Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Wednesday September 26 2018, @05:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the 100-to-1 dept.

Instagram Co-Founders to Step Down From Facebook

The two co-founders of Facebook Inc.'s popular Instagram app are stepping down, a move marking continued tumult at the social-networking giant.

The co-founders—Kevin Systrom, Instagram's chief executive, and Mike Krieger, chief technology officer—clashed with Facebook executives over the extent of Instagram's autonomy in recent months, according to people familiar with the matter. Earlier this year, Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg shifted a senior Facebook executive, Adam Mosseri, over to Instagram in anticipation that the founders might leave, one of the people said.

Among other things, Facebook officials, including Mr. Zuckerberg, clashed with the co-founders over growth tactics and how to more rapidly expand the photo-sharing app's user base, another person said. Senior Facebook officials had known the two men were frustrated working within a large company and had begun making preparations for them to leave, another person familiar with the matter said.

Also at NYT, The Atlantic, and Gizmodo.

See also: Facebook's Terrible Year Hits a New Low: The departure of Instagram's founders is a particularly painful sting during a truly rotten year.

Related: Facebook's Instagram Valued at $100 Billion (It Was Purchased for $1 Billion)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:08PM (22 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:08PM (#740433) Journal

    I assumed ikanreed was talking about multiple hypothetical Facebook insiders.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:22PM (21 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @08:22PM (#740441)

    "What if there were a billionaire with some kind of ethical boundary?"

    People forget (read: don't know) that the singular present subjunctive mood of "to be" is "were", not "was", making the above re-interpretation quite plausible.

    So, basically, I was stuck re-reading the remarks, trying out different approaches. What a drag.

    Folks, singular "they" is SHIT.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by acid andy on Wednesday September 26 2018, @10:47PM (11 children)

      by acid andy (1683) on Wednesday September 26 2018, @10:47PM (#740488) Homepage Journal

      Folks, singular "they" is THE SHIT.

      FTFY. It's an incredible handy gender-neutral pronoun that's been in use as such for a long time. You can't escape the fact that the word "he" does have some associations with masculinity, regardless of whether or not you choose to use it as a gender-neutral pronoun. The singular "they" just does not have that problem and when used carefully there need not be any ambiguity.

      --
      If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:17PM (10 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:17PM (#740508)

        The explosive usefulness of modern, variable-based mathematical logic can be traced back to this revelation: Making a statement about a single object is far superior to making an Aristotelian statement about a group of objects.

        Stupid, mundane communication can bear singular "they", because it's easy enough to fix it on the fly into something actually intelligible. However, when it comes to communicating a complex thought, it's the dregs.

        • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:53PM (6 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:53PM (#740537)

          Um... your understanding of algebra is... unique.

          May I blow your mind? Allow me to introduce you to the set of real numbers, which we may call ℝ for shorthand. In middle school algebra, x ∃ ℝ. Thus any statement concerning x is a statement concerning a group of objects.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:34AM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:34AM (#740549)

            All you've done is revealed that you are a sloppy thinker, which is fine enough for mundane purposes in life, but not for much else. That's why you've never noticed.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:29AM (4 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:29AM (#740574)

              Do you have a counterargument, or...?

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:24AM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:24AM (#740592)

                Your statement is false outright; it's not a logical fallacy that can be pointed out—it's just wrong.

                Write a sentence with "x", and we'll discuss it.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:37AM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:37AM (#740597)

                  Ok. The x is blue. Enlighten me.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:51AM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:51AM (#740605)

                    I don't need to enlighten you, because you enlightened yourself.

                    The x is blue

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:17AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:17AM (#740613)

                      Objection! Parent comment does not provide any enlightenment or discussion! Immediately provide discussion, or I will be forced to refer this matter to the infinite contract-enforcing turtles!

        • (Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:53AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:53AM (#740557) Journal

          Stupid, mundane communication can bear singular "they", because it's easy enough to fix it on the fly into something actually intelligible. However, when it comes to communicating a complex thought, it's the dregs.

          Are you ever going to give us an example of non-stupid or non-mundane communication? Because nothing you've said to date has been worth the fuss. "They" works for much more complex communication than anything you've said to date.

        • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:50PM (1 child)

          by acid andy (1683) on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:50PM (#740757) Homepage Journal

          When used in the singular form, "they" does refer to a single object and not a group of objects, a bit like how the gender-neutral form of "he" does refer to someone of an unspecified gender and not necessarily a male. The reason the singular "they" is better is because you can almost always distinguish it from the plural "they" just by looking at the verb. Conversely, there is often no evidence presented in a sentence to distinguish between the masculine "he" and the gender-neutral "he".

          --
          If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:43PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:43PM (#740831)

            There is just feminine "she". Everything else is merely non-feminine; there's the definite feminine, and then there is everything else, which depends on context—a special place is given solely to the feminine.

            Your singular they is a failure of the mind [soylentnews.org].

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:41PM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:41PM (#740530)

      Somebody got triggered.

      The only grammatical error in "What if they were a billionaire with some kind of ethical boundary." is the punctuation at the end. What is a question word, so the terminating punctuation should have been a question mark. Languages change over time. Deal with it, cupcake.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:52PM (7 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 26 2018, @11:52PM (#740536)

        Language is a protocol, and a protocol requires agreement.

        In mundane cases, one participant in the protocol can just re-write mistakes on the fly with little worry; that's the only reason singular "they" appears to work—it's always being re-written behind the scenes.

        You have provided yet another interpretation; we've already seen from the replies here that nobody is really talking about the same thing, because everyone is re-writing it in slightly different ways. But, he, diversity is a strength, amirite?

        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:02AM (4 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:02AM (#740542)

          I am sorry that you suffer from autism. It must make many activities that neurotypical people take for granted very difficult. I have heard promising things about the application of cannabis bud in cases of autism.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:31AM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @12:31AM (#740548)

            It has made me very rich.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:14AM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:14AM (#740567)

              Allow me to imitate the UN delegation.

              *snort* lol!

              Just to be clear, I am laughing at you.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:56AM (1 child)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:56AM (#740607)

                So, laugh away if it makes you feel better.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:20AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @03:20AM (#740617)

                  It does, thank you. Laughter has many benefits that are documented in the relevant medical literature. I appreciate your services as court jester. I really do! You're special to me! I will refer to you as she from now on. You've earned it!

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:36AM (1 child)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 27 2018, @01:36AM (#740576) Journal

          Language is a protocol, and a protocol requires agreement.

          Not from you, it doesn't. Your toddler has to agree because you have the terrible power of the fridge and the car keys.

          You have provided yet another interpretation; we've already seen from the replies here that nobody is really talking about the same thing, because everyone is re-writing it in slightly different ways. But, he, diversity is a strength, amirite?

          They would anyway. So many people here aren't actually responding to what you write in the first place. Particularly, the sort that starts posts with "So what you're saying is..."

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:27AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 27 2018, @02:27AM (#740593)

            Or are you just a parrot he's trained well?