In the last few days I have been asked by reporters about my opinions regarding the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.
While Jim Himes and Washington have pushed for government involvement in healthcare, insurance, Wall Street, and the auto industry, they have failed to deliver on one of government’s core functions: protecting its citizens and the environment.
Both BP and our federal government have failed to resolve this tragedy effectively and efforts must be accelerated if we are to contain the oil and prevent this catastrophe from becoming a major ecological devastation.
Our federal government is failing to lead in stopping this disaster. We need an effective federal government-- one that is smaller in size, but gets the job done when it comes to essential functions like public safety. Focus must return to essential government functions, not a mass take-over of private industry.
American taxpayers should not be forced to take on the burden for BP's inaction. Beyond just capping the leak, BP must assume responsibility for the cost of all ecological damage and immediately construct physical barriers to prevent any more oil from reaching the shores of the Gulf Coast.
Looking ahead, changes must be implemented to improve the safety of the off-shore drilling industry. The government and oil companies must create more effective emergency action plans. Our nation’s energy sustainability depends on the ability to improve off-shore drilling in a safe and environmentally mindful approach.
Old Greenwich boy not selected for Spelling Bee semis Greenwich Time Popham, who attends Old Greenwich School, was sponsored at the bee by Greenwich Time and The Advocate of Stamford. The champion speller to be crowned Friday ...
Boys lacrosse: Greenwich tops Tigers in state game Ridgefield Press The Greenwich High boys lacrosse team spotted host Ridgefield a 2-0 lead and then stormed back for an 11-6 victory in a Class L state tournament first-round ...
Dollar Stands to Gain Nomatter What Jobs Report Shows Wall Street Journal ... over European turmoil, as well as steadily improving data," said Andrew Wilkinson, senior market analyst at Interactive Brokers in Greenwich, Conn. ...
Screwdriver assault case headed to trial Greenwich Time During Thursday's hearing, Comerford also granted a request for Parrotta to be permitted to attend an Old Greenwich fitness facility to help rehabilitate ...
GHS baseball claws back late but falls in finals Greenwich Post The Greenwich High School baseball team kept chipping away at its six-run deficit throughout most of the Fairfield County Interscholastic Athletic ...
A Private Bank for Aging BSDs DealBreaker.Com The Greenwich institution was founded by some ex-Merrill Lynch execs, including Dan Tully and David Komansky, in 2008 as a place where senior BSD's can get ...
A Mayor by Her Side, but Politics Woos Her, Too New York Times The daughter of a biochemist, who grew up in Old Greenwich, Conn., Ms. Taylor attended Milton Academy in Massachusetts, Dartmouth College and Columbia ...
Summer Shakespeare, Outside and Urban New York Times "Othello" will be presented first at Pinkney Park in Rowayton (June 15-26) and then at Roger Sherman Baldwin Park in Greenwich (July 2-11) ...
THE FACEBOOK HOUSE OF CARDS WILL FALL FASTER THAN AOL
Hey, Accidental Billionaire Mark Zuckergerg - 'You've got mail!'
When Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg was a preteen people were paying charged me $30.00 a month for email access
Today, the "old timers" remember screeching static of the dial-up connection will forever be wedded in many Americans' memories to the omnipresence of America Online in the early years of the web. From the movies to Saturday Night Live, the mechanized baritone catch phrase "You've got mail!" was parodied and parroted for years--a recognition that in the pop culture.
In AOL's Heyday things were so bright for AOL that Steve Case needed to wear sunglasses as fools paid millions for one keyword.
Greenwich Roundup once covered half of his office wall with all those free diskettes and unsolicited CDs with the AOL software on them
Even, Worse Facebook's Largest Profit Center Involves Scamming It's User Base With Sleazy Ads Connected To Mafia Wars And Farmville.
Remember When AOL's Stock Was Valued At $226 Billion.
Remember All Of Those Class Action Lawsuits Over AOL's Sleazy Billing Practices.
What The Hell Was Bill Gates Thinking When He Payed $240 million for a 1.6 percent stake in Facebook?
Hello It's Time For A Reality Check: Facebook Has Yet Earn A Profit And It's Burning Through Cash Like No Tomorrow
Greenwich Hedge Funds Refuse To Invest In This So-Called $15 Billion Company That Earns 33% Of It's Income From Ads That Rip Off Users Bank Accounts.
However, The Russian's Like Investing In Companies That Violate American Consumer's Privacy And Sell The Data To The Highest Bidder.
Are Greenwich Residents Going To Join The Federal Class-Action Suit Over Facebook's Scummy Zynga Ads?
Facebook and Zynga are the defendants in a federal class-action lawsuit which seeks millions for social network users scammed in online games.
Facebook investors like Microsoft can't be happy about this.
Greenwich residents who have been scammed are encouraged to contact the Sacramento-based law firm of Kershaw, Cutter & Ratinoff
These legal eagles looking for victims of scammy ads in games like Mafia Wars and Farmville to potentially file a class action suit.
The firm's suit is active in the federal district court in Northern California.
Can You Say, "Recurring Bank Charges."
It Locks Like Mafia Wars And Farmville's Platform Has Been
Off Shored To Nigeria, Where The Locals Are Very Adept At
Ripping Off The Good Citizen's Of Greenwich.
Neither gaming start up Zynga nor social network Facebook actually originates the advertisements in question; instead, other companies take out ads in Zynga's games, which run on Facebook's network, and the two companies make reportedly large sums of money from the offers.
Some of the ads trick Greenwich residents into signing up for unauthorized cell phone charges or expensive mail-order products like educational CDs, typically by disguising them as "free" offers or "free trials," or as part of an "online quiz."
How Facebook And Zynga Make Money
Zynga reportedly takes in close to one-third of its revenue from "commercial offers" like those, and Facebook does well too, as KC&R lawyers point out in their complaint.
Please see lawsuit document excerpts below.
Swift's attorneys also point to Zynga CEO Mark Pincus' damning video confession that "I did every horrible thing in the book just to get revenues" in their complaint, indicating it will be a significant piece of courtroom evidence.
The prospect of being on the hook for massive damages has to make both potential Zynga and Facebook's investors sweat.
Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook are the darlings of Silicon Valley, with clueless publications like Forbes having valued them in the billions of dollars, while Zynga has suckered the elite firm of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers into investing into the scam.
Yet Facebook and Zynga have come to rely on greasy advertisers for much of their revenue; in addition to the game-ad scammers,
Facebook is also sells ad to marketers who resort to tactics like using stolen pictures of apparent underaged girls to promote their products in Conneticut.
If the companiess are found to be liable of helping con customers by working with these sorts of slimeballs, it's hard to say where the payouts might end.
A brief history of Mark Zuckerberg's Greenwich legal woes
December 2002: Greenwich residents and Harvard students Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, conceive of a college social network and hire Sanjay Mavinkurve to work on what later becomes ConnectU
May 2003: Mavinkurve graduates from Harvard, with the site still unfinished; Victor Gao, another Harvard student, later picks up work on the site
November 2003: After Gao leaves the project, ConnectU's founders hire Mark Zuckerberg to work on Harvard Connection, a website that later became ConnectU
January 11, 2004: While still promising to finish Harvard Connection, Zuckerberg registers the domain for thefacebook.com, a fact that the ConnectU founders allege that didn't disclose in a meeting three days later
February 4, 2004: Zuckerberg launches thefacebook.com
April 2004: Facebook expands to other colleges
April 13, 2004: Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskowitz, and Eduardo Saverin form Thefacebook.com LLC, a partnership (despite this, Saverin is not credited today as a founder by the company)
Spring 2004: ConnectU hires a Web-development firm, iMarc
May 2004: Having appealed to Harvard administrators, without success, to rule that Zuckerberg violated the school's honor code, ConnectU's founders appeal to Harvard president Larry Summers, who also rebuffs them
May 21, 2004: ConnectU launches its first website, Harvard Connection
September 2, 2004: ConnectU files a lawsuit against Zuckerberg and other Facebook founders
May 26, 2005: Accel Partners invests $13 million in Facebook
August 23, 2005: Facebook, at bad-boy entrepreneur Sean Parker's instigation, buys the facebook.com domain name for $200,000
October 14, 2005: Facebook's founders file a motion to dismiss ConnectU's lawsuit
September 11, 2006: Facebook allows any user with an email address to join the site, and its user base begins to grow explosively
March 28, 2007: A court dismisses ConnectU's original lawsuit, without prejudice, allowing ConnectU to immediately file a new lawsuit against Facebook's founders as well as the company itself
February 2008: Greenwich residents Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss reached a confidential settlement agreement. Despite the confidentiality agreement, a law firm that had previously represented ConnectU inadvertently disclosed the $65 million settlement amount.
GREENWICH FACEBOOKERS BEWARE
PLEASE READ HOW FACEBOOK
AND MARK ZUCKERBERG
SCAMS IT"S USERS TODAY
Click To Enlage Facebook Lawsuit Documents
ONE Last Comment About Mark Zuckerberg
And Fraud, Hype And Hysteria About Facebook
Facebooks Success Has Little To Do With
CEO Mark Zuckerberg
Its a website.
Which is coming of age at a time alot of people who never saw the web as a place to participate, found it.
But you know, all the companies that WISH they had 500 million "users" are making so much more money than facebook, its kind of a joke.
This is yet another illusion in the "can we find a business model for the web?". And the Facebook issue proves you can't.
Unless you traffic personal information to all advertisers and other comers.
Facebook Ii the new white/yellow pages.
How many times have you had those phone books dropped on your doorstep and thrown in it in the garbage in the last 5 years?
Every time you want to find a person or business you go to google and not Facebook.
The white pages were based on selling our phone numbers and addresses to advertisers.
Where do you think telemarketing came from?
Facebook is just the newest form.
And if you think that 30% of Facebook accounts aren't spam/nuisance accounts you are full of it.
Even google and yahoo readily admit that percentage on their own businesses and they have much more rigorous programs in place to nuke nuisance accounts than Facebook.
And Let's not even mention all the Russian's Facebook APP spam.
Just how many Facebook accounts are created in Uzbeckistan
Greenwich Roundup has dozens of Facebook accounts, there are at least two for each roundup blog.
About a month ago we were told that there were about 400 Million Facebook accounts, now we are told that there are 500 Million Facebook accounts.
That's a monthly growth rate of 20% or annual componded annual growth rate of
that is close to 240%. At this rate in less than 36 months every man woman and child on earth will be on Facebook, even if they have never even seen a computer.
What click fraud is to google, account fraud will be to Facebook.
The only reason there is all of this hype about Facebook is because the money losing company needs more cash.
The reason for privacy changes on your account is a desparate need for cash at Facebook.
Facebook is a great place for people to discover the web and its potential and then leave it just like AOL.
Whoever buys Facebook will be the next Time Warner.
As for Mark Zuckerberg, well its pretty embarrassing.
Zuckerberg has no vision,
Zuckerberg has no balls
And his talent is clearly in question.
Soon folks will realize that he stole and outsourced this whole effort and then took all the credit.
Facebook doesn’t put the user first or understand why they should.
Facebook doesn’t care about you.
Facebook doesn’t care about it’s partners.
Facebook will screw you, it’s partners and your grandmother over if there is a chance of a quick buck.
Facebook will be the leper of social networking within the next 18 months.
Strong words I know, but I’m not being hysterical. I’m simply calling it as I see it.
The internal culture at Facebook is not one of a consumer first company. It’s an ego centric culture of “we will tell the consumer what’s best for them, even if it’s actually what’s best for us”.
Lets start with Mark Zuckerberg shall we? His ego is apparently second only to that of Steve Jobs (who in turn, has an ego second only to mine), but unlike Jobs, Zuckerbergs past is mired in controversy, shady dealings and accusations of downright theft.
Not exactly the kind of guy I’d want running my company (if I was lucky enough to own the next Facebook).
Jason Calacanis (the man I love to hate, yet secretly have a man crush on) said in his email yesterday that Zuckerberg has over played his hand and went on to list a string of accusations, shady dealings and actual rip-offs performed by zippy Zuckerberg that reads as a “what not to do” of business.
Jason outlines, in no uncertain terms, why Zuckerberg and by extension Facebook (cultured from the top down) just cannot be trusted.
The biggest mistake most new players make at poker is overplaying their hand. They spend so much time thinking of the ways they can win that they forget all the ways they can lose. Overplaying hands can affect even the most seasoned players, especially after they’ve won a couple of hands in a row.
Over the past month, Mark Zuckerberg, the hottest new card player in town, has overplayed his hand. Facebook is officially “out,” as in uncool, amongst partners, parents and pundits all coming to the realization that Zuckerberg and his company are–simply put–not trustworthy.
Until today I was of the opinion that Zuckerberg suddenly vanishing off the face of the planet would save Facebook and allow them get back to the core of what made them popular in the first place: being trusted, secure and private.
Alas, this is not to be and of such thoughts are pipe-dreams made.
The Zuckerberg culture of “screw unto others” has evidently become endemic and was never as evident as Elliot Schrage’s (Facebooks vice president for public policy) answers to questions posed by readers of the New York Times.
Take this question and answer as an example:
It used to be that I could limit what strangers saw about me to almost nothing. I could not show my profile picture, not allow them to “poke” or message me, certainly not allow them to view my profile page. Now, even my interests have to be public information. Why can’t I control my own information anymore? –sxchen, New York
Joining Facebook is a conscious choice by vast numbers of people who have stepped forward deliberately and intentionally to connect and share. We study user activity. We’ve found that a few fields of information need to be shared to facilitate the kind of experience people come to Facebook to have. That’s why we require the following fields to be public: name, profile photo (if people choose to have one), gender, connections (again, if people choose to make them), and user ID number. Facebook provides a less satisfying experience for people who choose not to post a photo or make connections with friends or interests. But, other than name and gender, nothing requires them to complete these fields or share information they do not want to share. If you’re not comfortable sharing, don’t.
What Schrage is essentially saying here is: You choose to use Facebook so tough shit.
No mention of the fact that many of the hundreds of millions of people that use Facebook decided to do so when they were a trusted network. People that signed up unaware that Zuckerberg and Co. would expose their life and data to the universe at large at a later date, without so much as a “thank you m’am”.
I’m tempted to call out the utter failure of the New York Times to point out just how wrong Schrage is in some of his answers, but I trust that you can see that for yourself.
Trust used to be the currency of Facebook but in past months it appears that Facebook and Zuckerberg are on an all out adrenaline fueled money grab and our privacy is the currency Facebook is trading for that money.
The only problem is that the exchange rate between trust and privacy is very steep. It only takes giving away a little privacy to lose a lot of trust and Zuckerberg is rapidly running out of privacy to pawn off. Not to mention the well of trust is nearly exhausted.
If I were a more skeptical or cynical man, instead of accusing Zukerberg of being a sniveling, ego maniacal, greedy git, I’d say that he was deliberately trying to run Facebook into the ground.
Think about it.
Facebook is the big thing right now. Yet, everyone, even Zuckerberg, knows that Facebook can’t last forever. There will be a changing of the guard with regard to the dominant social network. It happens every few years but, unlike the dinosaurs, old zippy Zuckerberg knows the meteorite is coming.
He’s just not sure when, or from where.
Perhaps Zuckerberg sees that Facebook has now reached that critical mass of users, where the whining of tech bloggers and tech media isn’t enough to deter the mainstream and has decided to embark on a massive money grab, cashing in our privacy, so that they can cash out with as much as possible before the next big thing dethrones them and Facebooks value starts to plummet.
Whether it’s Zuckerbergs ego and sheer naivety or some dastardly plan to get as much as possible as quickly as possible before the Facebook killer arrives, one thing is certain:
Those of us who wish to continue using Facebook to connect with our friends, family and readers, will just have to buy a bottle of lube, bend over and Zucker up!
UPDATE:
MEMO TO MARK ZUCKERBERG: STEP DOWN NOW
This would be laughable, if it weren't so sad.
They asked one question that a sweaty Mark Zuckerberg flubbed, then he spent the rest of the time taking off his hoodie.
It is just uncomfortable to watch and see the real accidental billionaire who is in charge of your personal information.
Zuckerberg's performance was more in line with something you might see in a high school; as opposed to the senior exec of a multi-billion dollar company.
There's no reason for anyone to think Mark Zuckerberg can or will improve.
After watching this D8 interview one must think that there is no way that Mark Zuckerberg can take Facebook public.
They need a different CEO that investors can trust
In short, Mark, you don't care about other human beings enough to deserve an effect this many of them.
There comes a time when one must reassess and change their direction.
Mark Zuckerberg That Time Is Now !!!!
========================================= Please send your comments, news tips, press releases and Facebook horror stories to
