> Designing it so that the users like it enough to use it on a regular basis, maintain it
Apparently those components had nothing to do with him
> scale it
That seems to be one of his contributions, the second is to have some staying power.
I've been on the receiving end of a character like mr. Zuckerberg at some point and I think that by glorifying him the people that monitor this sort of stuff might get the idea that this sort of behaviour is ok.
Most people don't understand how technology works. They think it's the "leadership" (I hate that word) of the founder / CEO that, somewhat miraculously, pushes technology forward.
I do not admire nor glorify Zuckerberg. I don't understand why some people do. But then, why do people glorify Steve Jobs? Sure, without Jobs' sense of design and aesthetics, Apple would have never become more than a garage startup, but without Wozniak's technical expertise, Jobs would have never been in a position where his sense of aesthetics could make a difference, and he would have ended up a failed pothead like many of his generation...
People like having a figure-head. Someone or thing to attribute success or failure to. Look at the office of the President. People expected Obama to rush in and fix everything, put people into homes, and make America some sort of utopian society. Is that likely? Is it even possible? I highly doubt it.
True, without the Woz, Apple would be nothing. That doesn't mean that Jobs is nothing. He's the figure-head of Apple. If Wozniak had've taken the position that Jobs now holds, there'd probably be many people preaching the gospel according to Wozniak.
It's much easier to personify a company through an actual person. A company is sort of the amorphous blob that does things. You may never know exactly how a specific company does certain things, but having a person to attribute that to certainly helps. It's not exactly right, but it's not entirely wrong either.
The link between Jobs/Wozniak and Zuckerberg is interesting. I would certainly consider Zuckerberg a hacker, but not nearly in the same realm as Jobs and Wozniak.
Facebook is a product of the modern day web environment. Its longevity has yet to be seen. If 2015 rolls around and its a public company that is still innovating then thats one thing, but if it becomes more of a cluttered site in its pursuit to be more like -insert recently popular site here (currently twitter)- then thats another.
Apparently those components had nothing to do with him
> scale it
That seems to be one of his contributions, the second is to have some staying power.
I've been on the receiving end of a character like mr. Zuckerberg at some point and I think that by glorifying him the people that monitor this sort of stuff might get the idea that this sort of behaviour is ok.