Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Input: I'm a faithful Facebook user and defender. But it's a bit rich to hear CEO Mark Zuckerberg boast about his company's psychic mastery of users' privacy wishes one month after Americans went apoplectic about Facebook's privacy updates. Here's Zuckerberg: 
  
 "In the last 5 or 6 years, blogging has taken off in a huge way and all these different services that have people sharing all this information. People have really gotten comfortable not only sharing more information and different kinds, but more openly and with more people. That social norm is just something that's evolved over time. 
  
  
  
 Hold it. The fact that blogging has taken off in the last five or six years is evidence that people like publicly sharing their thoughts about food and politics and Jersey Shore. It does not at all mean that we've gotten comfortable with information we thought was private -- our phone numbers, our drunken photos, our private wall-to-wall chats -- suddenly being upchucked onto the World Wide Web in one messy and meaningless purge of regional networks. 
  
 Privacy is about control, and when Facebook changes its privacy control rules every six months to keep pace with the zeitgeist (or whatever), its users lose both control and privacy. Zuckerberg goes on: 
  
  
  
  
  
 "We view it as our role in the system to constantly be innovating and be updating what our system is to reflect what the current social norms are. "So now, a lot of companies would be trapped by the conventions and their legacies of what they've built, doing a privacy change for 350 million users is not the type of thing that a lot of companies would do. But we viewed that as a really important thing, to always keep a beginner's mind and think: what would we do if we were starting the company now, and starting the site now, and we decided that these would be the social norms now and we just went for it." 
  
 It's cheeky of Zuckerberg to highlight Facebook's talent to "reflect...social norms" when every Facebook privacy update is met with something approximating funereal wailing. It's especially sketchy that Zuckerberg's diagnosis of our Brave New World of diminishing privacy is utterly self-serving. The more information that Facebook users share, the more information Facebook can vacuum into whatever ad-based revenue stream they're debuting this quarter. 
  
 Facebook is trapped by its own conventions, too. It's a social networking site, a goldmine of private information. Like a Middle Eastern country sitting on top of an ocean of oil, Facebook feels a business-driven pressure to let outsiders (ad companies) drill deep into their reserves, so they can shove Coldplay tickets in front of Coldplay fans and job listings in front of college seniors, and so forth. Facebook's incentive is entirely to move toward more openness. It's one thing to admit that a business is a business. It's another to pretend that your business objectives just happen to line up perfectly with your users' wishes, when you know very well that the opposite is true. 
  
  ||||| In 2004 everyone freaked out when Gmail launched because Google would be reading your emails to figure out what ads to serve you. “Privacy advocates objected to the advertising model, which involves Google’s robot eyes scanning every e-mail for keywords and displaying contextual advertisements alongside a user’s inbox,” noted Wired. 
  
 That might sound familiar to your great-great-great grandparents. Supposedly many people were apprehensive about using telephones in the early 1900s because they knew the phone companies could listen in on their phone calls. There are people who won’t use phones today because of the ease in which calls can be tapped. 
  
 But the rest of us seem to be ok with Gmail. And our phone. That’s because the benefits of those products far outweigh the privacy costs. And people are going to be just fine with Facebook, too. Even if they did do a switcharoo on privacy settings a month ago that is still reverberating through the tech press. 
  
 Contrary to published reports, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg did not say “the age of privacy is over” in my interview with him last Friday evening at the Crunchies. You can watch the video here for yourself. What he said is that he wants Facebook to change with its users, and keep its product fresh. Which is exactly what they are doing. 
  
 The fact is that privacy is already really, really dead. Howard Lindzon nailed it the other day when he said “Equifax, Transunion, Capital One, American Express and their cousins raped our privacy,” Everything we do, everything we buy, everywhere we go is tracked and sitting in a database somewhere. Our location via our phone, or our car GPS. Our credit card transactions. Everything. Honestly, a picture of you taking a bong hit in college is mice nuts compared to the mountain of data that is gathered and exploited about every single one of us every single day. You just don’t really see that other stuff because those companies don’t like to talk about the data their gathering. I don’t see an Equifax blog post outlining exactly how they are gathering and selling your information, for example. 
  
 The point is that we like Facebook. Very, very few of us are going to stop using it. It was inevitable that they’d rip the bandaid off and try to get their users to make data public. It’s what’s best for Facebook. And if users hate it enough, someone else will launch a competing service that has different policies and thrive. You can guess what the odds of that happening are. 
  
 I spoke to Blippy CEO Philip Kaplan earlier tonight. Blippy is a service that lets users publish everything they buy with their credit cards. 
  
 Crazy right? Who’d want to do that? Well, apparently a lot do. The company has let in 2,500 people so far. Those 2,500 people are publishing $200,000 worth of purchases a day to their friends. It’s less than a month old and they’ve tracked $3.8 million in transactions already, with an average transaction size of $46. 
  
 And more than 10,000 people are on the waiting list to get an account and gladly share their consumption behavior with the world. 
  
 Why are they doing it? To share what they’re buying, and talk about it. Or to let advertisers see what they like and tailor offers to them. Or something. The point is, we don’t really care about privacy anymore. And Facebook is just giving us exactly what we want. |||||
Output:
Facebook's decision to make users' private data public is still reverberating, and Michael Arrington wishes the "Luddites" opposed to the development would just be quiet and face up to a modern reality: "Privacy is already really, really dead." Big companies already know the intimate details of our lives via credit cards, GPS devices, cell phones, etc. "We don’t really care about privacy anymore," he writes at TechCrunch. "And Facebook is just giving us exactly what we want." Mark Zuckerberg himself espouses a similar view, arguing that our comfort with sharing personal information is an evolving social norm. Derek Thompson isn't buying any of it at the Atlantic. This is just about money. "Like a Middle Eastern country sitting on top of an ocean of oil, Facebook feels a business-driven pressure to let outsiders (ad companies) drill deep into their reserves, so they can shove Coldplay tickets in front of Coldplay fans and job listings in front of college seniors, and so forth." Facebook shouldn't try to play it off as anything else.