Mark Zuckerberg, Inventor

theodp writes "Move over, Thomas Edison. Here comes Mark Zuckerberg, inventor extraordinaire. Zuck's still waiting for that elusive first patent to be issued, but take a gander at the Facebook founder's patent application for Dynamically Generating a Privacy Summary to get an idea of what's in the works. After you check boxes on a form to indicate that 'Everyone from San Francisco, CA, Social Network Provider, and Harvard' can see your profile, Zuckerberg's 'invention' will miraculously display: 'People from San Francisco, CA, Social Network Provider, and Harvard can see your profile.' How dare Rolling Stone question his inventiveness!"

Comments

Slashdot stories have gotten very sarcastic lately

[Anonymous Coward]

Some deserve it. But I don't read this site for editorials, I read it for some of the scientists and engineers that will comment after the fact.

But this kind of initial submission makes it hard to even read the front page.

What a genius...

[edwebdev]

Maybe Mark should also patent using a database to store information.

Edison is a pretty good comparison

[MosesJones]

While I know its heresy to say it... Edison did just plain steal a lot of ideas and then pass them off as his own inventions. In fact the lack of global patent protection was a major reason for Edison becoming the person he did, in reality he lived off the inventions of others.

Edison was a patent troll ;)

Re:Grapes Taste Bitter To You?

[MikeBabcock]

I don't really understand the view that because someone succeeded they must be smart. This isn't necessarily true at all. Success is often a matter of luck or timing that had nothing to do with skill.

For example, Apple didn't succeed with their Newton handheld but Palm computing did with their Pilot. Most people agree its a case of market timing, even though the Newton was unarguably a more powerful device all-round.

Whether Mark stole an idea or not should be argued on its own merits, whether he succeeded in the resulting application of that theft or not.

People (with money) steal ideas all the time and then hire people to implement it for them leaving true inventors empty handed. Ask the inventor of the Yo-yo how his patent fights against big companies have been for example.

No matter what you were told in school, market forces are NOT fair. They may determine several things, but determining who DESERVES credit or compensation is not one of them.

ConnectU

[thebonafortuna]

If this guy is the Thomas Edison of the 21st century, its no wonder we don't have flying cars.

Re:It isn't about the technology

[eln]

Facebook seems to hire based on Facebook. The women coming out of the building are good looking and the guys are hunks. I think you're confused. The people you're seeing coming out of the building are coming from the yoga studio and the beauty salon. The Facebook employees come and go through the back door under the cover of darkness, like all geeks.

Re:Grapes Taste Bitter To You?

[spun]

For Greenspan and the others to trash Zuckerberg's business acumen is the height of stupidity. Really? No one ever succeeded through dumb luck? Success is a guarantee of competence? I suppose the fact that you aren't a billionaire proves you are incompetent? Zuckerberg is a schmuck who lucked out, nothing more.

Re:Grapes Taste Bitter To You?

[ThinkComp]

Hi there,

I don't know who you are, but I'm Aaron. So I thought I'd clarify something.

The Rolling Stone article got a lot wrong unfortunately. In my book, which sadly the reporter did not read too closely, I referred to Mark as naive in reference to a specific event: his not knowing A) what Viacom was, B) that MTV was part of it (despite having ambitions to create the next MTV), and C) that Viacom purchased other companies. To me, that seemed to illustrate a certain level of naivete at the time. I'm sure Mark is more familiar with Viacom now, since they offered to buy Facebook long ago.

Also, for the record, Mark is a paper billionaire, not a billionaire yet. I have to give him some credit for that, but when the methods of achieving that kind of success amount to theft and deception on a such a grand scale, it's hard to give too much credit.

You're free to think whatever you want about me, of course, but I did want to make sure that people have their facts straight.

Aaron

Re:Grapes Taste Bitter To You?

[Lumpy]

There are 3 facts about success.

1 - it about WHO you know and WHO knows you. Having the right network will make you a CEO.

2 - it's all about timing. I dont care how innovative your idea or product is, if it's not the right time for it, it will fail.

3 - Dumb luck. Many successes confound everyone. Twitter for example, what an inane idea, yet people are taking to it like flies.

Being a genius, inventor, or guru means NOTHING. Look at Tesla. he actually invented radio, AC power, and 90% of what we use today. Problem is other turds like Marconi used Tesla's ideas (and patents) to beat him to the patent office. Yet History still shows incorrectly as Marconi as the inventor of radio, even though congress and other bodies overturned the claims and gave it to Tesla. He died a pauper alone in his apartment. Tesla was as smart as Einstein if not smarter. He had bad timing and was did not have the right network.

Re:Slashdot stories have gotten very sarcastic lat

[mujadaddy]

Wait, this site has thingies above the comments? Never noticed.

Re:Grapes Taste Bitter To You?

[sideshow]

Yet Zuckerberg is the 24-year old BILLIONAIRE and Greenspan isn't.

Billionaire? Really? Is all that money on a piece of paper, or in his bank account?

Until Facebook has (at the very least) an IPO, Zuckerberg isn't a billionaire, he just owns part of an entity that some people believe to be worth billions.