When Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Zuckerberg to name his biggest competitor, Zuckerberg couldn’t name one. He was pressed repeatedly on Facebook’s large size, and at one point, he was asked whether Facebook was too powerful. Zuckerberg demurred. “It certainly doesn’t feel like that to me,” he said in response to Graham’s monopoly question.
Senators do seem to be grappling with Facebook’s massive power in a way they haven’t before. But it’s not clear they have any coherent strategy to increase the amount of competition in the social media marketplace.
The CEO took numerous questions about the company’s business model and whether it could truly protect users’ privacy given that it relies so heavily on collecting data about their lives and behavior.
Multiple senators asked Zuckerberg whether he might consider a paid, ad-free version of Facebook in the future. He told Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that there would always be a free version of Facebook, suggesting a paid option might be possible. Later, he told another senator that a paid version would be worth thinking about.
多个参议院都问道有没有可能出免费无广告版。扎克伯格对 Orrin Hatch 说，脸书一定得有一个收费版，仿佛暗示有可能会有免费版，但接上去他答复另一位议员时示意，不会思考出免费版。
三、扎克伯格正在考虑 AI 的作用
Whenever asked about how Facebook would improve its moderation tools, Zuckerberg invoked the promise of AI to help Facebook quickly sort through hate speech and other problematic posts. It certainly seems possible that AI will improve Facebook’s content moderation efforts, but it remains unproven.
无论何时被问及脸书如何改良信息调理工具，扎克伯格都会提到AI能够在将来疾速删除怨恨舆论和其余有成绩的推文。看起来 AI 真的能晋升信息调理的才能，但如今还说不准。
For years now, Facebook has struggled to contain an urban legend that the company’s ad targeting is so effective because the company listens to your conversations in real time through your phone’s microphone. Thanks to Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI), this is now a matter of public record. “Yes or no, does Facebook use audio obtained from mobile devices to enrich personal information about users?” he asked. “No,” Zuckerberg said.
假的。多年以来，由于脸书的广告投放效率太高，坊间就有了脸书会经过实时监控手机麦克风获取用户信息的风闻。多亏了 Gary Peters，如今有定论了。“脸书经过麦克风搜集用户集体信息是真的还是假的？”他问到。“假的。”扎克伯格说。
Senators peppered Facebook with questions about the basic features of its data-collection and advertising practices. How does Facebook acquire data? How long does it keep that data? How can users control what data they share? These are important questions, and senators were surely speaking for the majority of Americans when they asked them.
At the same time, they frittered away hours of testimony by asking the CEO questions that can be answered by Googling. And they mostly failed to answer deeper questions about how Facebook uses the data it collects. Of course, some senators argued that complexity itself is the problem. As Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) put it — bluntly, if not helpfully — “your user agreement sucks.”
然而，他们把贵重的发问工夫糜费在了能 Google 出答案的成绩上。而且，他们也没有就脸书如何应用用户数据做更深层次的发问。当然，有一些议员也说了，脸书太复杂自身就是个成绩。正如 John Kennedy 说的，“你的用户协定太 TM 长了。”