We'd all survive if Twitter shut down for a short while during major riots. Social media isn't any more important than a train station, a road or a bus service. We don't worry about police temporarily closing those. Common sense. If riot info and fear is spreading by Facebook and Twitter, shut them off for an hour or two, then restore.

Before I was even famous, I was famous on Facebook.

Think about what people are doing on Facebook today. They're keeping up with their friends and family, but they're also building an image and identity for themselves, which in a sense is their brand. They're connecting with the audience that they want to connect to. It's almost a disadvantage if you're not on it now.

Between the three, Facebook is literally everyone I've ever shaken hands with at a conference or kissed on the cheek at Easter. Twitter seems to be everyone I am entertained by or I wish to meet some day. Foursquare seems to be everyone I run into on a regular basis. All three of those social graphs are powerful in their own.

It's a bit harder being on TV. I would be open to finding dates through Facebook or Instagram though, does that count? I do love flicking through profiles on my friend's dating apps though!

I truly believe that what we're seeing with online dating is very similar to what happened with the Myspace-Facebook era, where Myspace was once this place for online connecting for a very select group of young people. And then Facebook kind of hit at this moment where it was acceptable for everybody to do it.

The trail of dating sites relying heavily on Facebook is littered with failures.

Facebook and pictures on the Internet have created such a different way of dating. It's not necessarily good because an obsessive quality can develop in people.

I just thank God my husband and I found each other before the advent of social media. I can't imagine dating someone and seeing what they're doing on their Facebook page. And people breaking up with each other over texts now? We had to break up with each other face to face back then.

My goal was never to make Facebook cool. I am not a cool person.

Elon Musk is talking about silicon nanoparticles pulsing through our veins to make us sort of semi-cyborg computers. But why not take a noninvasive approach? I've been working and trying to think and invent a way to do this for a number of years and finally happened upon it and left Facebook to do it.

I'm not on Twitter or Facebook and don't even use email. I don't trust computers: one day they'll all break down, and everyone will be knackered.

Google is about information and computers and making things really fast. Facebook is about the sharing and connections. These missions give these companies direction and motivation.

Computers tend to separate us from each other - Mum's on the laptop, Dad's on the iPad, teenagers are on Facebook, toddlers are on the DS, and so on.

I just think people have a lot of fiction. But, you know, I mean, the real story of Facebook is just that we've worked so hard for all this time. I mean, the real story is actually probably pretty boring, right? I mean, we just sat at our computers for six years and coded.

Everyone knows, or should know, that everything we type on our computers or say into our cell phones is being disseminated throughout the datasphere. And most of it is recorded and parsed by big data servers. Why do you think Gmail and Facebook are free? You think they're corporate gifts? We pay with our data.

The real story of Facebook is just that we've worked so hard for all this time. I mean, the real story is actually probably pretty boring, right? I mean, we just sat at our computers for six years and coded.

In one sense, Facebook is very focused as an address book, as efficient communication. It's like e-mail or like IM or something like that. And we do those things, too, but we do so much more. We try to focus on the whole world and all the things that people are interested in, rather than just people to people, or one to one communication.

A lot of things have changed since the days of Flickr. Facebook has concentrated the sociality of the Internet within its blue borders, like a Walmart siphoning off the mom-and-pop shops that formerly comprised the Internet's gathering places. Communication, in the age of mobile dominance, has become, of necessity, shorter and snack-sized.

People don't use Evite or Facebook events for their weddings. But they do use Paperless Post. It's the sign of a paradigm because it is the most momentous occasion in most people's lives. It represents the most formal type of offline communication.

Seeing other people is incredibly engaging, and that's one of the drivers that made us partner with Facebook - social communication. Not social newsfeeds, but actual face-to-face, seeing multiple avatars in a play experience, that's going to be a very big part of the future in VR.

I am no technophobe. I like being able to calibrate communication, depending on the situation - texting for the simple and immediate; email for business or when I want to put some lag time into the exchange; Twitter to promote something; Facebook to draw a crowd.

Your insurance broker has your telephone number, but your insurance broker doesn't have your Facebook ID. I think they are very different modes of communication. Commingling them can come with risk and peril.

When I'm putting some communication out on Twitter or Facebook or Instagram, I think that it's helping me, my brain, you know, because it's always somehow stimulated by people who are sending things to me. And it works both ways. It's great. My brain is very happy about it.