6 ms·

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not wi

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not with surge pricing etc

kristianc 10y ago
The companies as they are today may not be achieving their mission - that doesn't mean that they won't in the future. Facebook has succeeded in making the world a more open and transparent place - people have the ability to share information that matters to them and have people around the world find out about it. There are fewer places around the world for those in power to hide information away now. That's different to whether Facebook as a company is transparent. Uber likewise may or may not be reliable now - surge pricing only ever increases the price of an Uber to the same as the price as a black cab where I live, but it's pretty clear that Uber's ambitions of self driving cars do not include surge pricing.
- mememachine 10y ago
  Theres no discernable progress towards their mission. Call it what it is, PR puff.
nostrademons 10y ago
So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape any of their results or content, you will be banned quite quickly. Facebook's is "make the world a more open & transparent place", and yet they have done more than any company since AOL to turn the web into a series of walled gardens. Plus Mark Zuckerburg bought the 4 houses adjacent to his so that neighbors couldn't look onto his property, and walks around with a 24/7 security team. Uber's is "make transportation as reliable as running water", but their goal is for people to give up their own cars - which they can use any time, any where, for zero marginal cost - to be at the mercy of Uber's service. Palantir's is "Palantir Technologies is a mission-driven company, and a core component of that mission is protecting our fundamental rights to privacy and civil liberties", and they sell to the CIA so they can spy on you. At the same time, these companies also do many things that actually are in accord with their mission statements. I think that you can reconcile this by realizing that the fundamental imperative for every company is continued existence. Those who fail at this are replaced by those who succeed. The mission statement is a tool to ensure continued existence, because it serves to align & recruit employees with similar values, without which there would be no organization. But when there are other imperatives that are necessary for the company's continued existence, even when they contradict the mission statement, the company's existence takes priority. Hence Google is very strict about their proprietary information, even though their mission is to make all information universally accessible; Facebook wants all content on Facebook, even though they claim to be about making everything open & transparent; Uber wants to make transportation reliable & easy, as long as it's on Uber; and Palantir wants to protect civil liberties only so long as it involves buying Palantir software.
- tyre 10y ago
  > Uber's is "make transportation as reliable as running > water", but their goal is for people to give up their own > cars - which they can use any time, any where, for zero > marginal cost - to be at the mercy of Uber's service. I'm not sure what car you're driving, but in my experience there is a significant marginal cost. I no longer own a car, exclusively using public transit + Lyft, because I don't want to deal with maintenance, paying for parking, gas, insurance, etc.
  - nostrademons 10y ago
    Maintenance, insurance, etc. are largely fixed costs: you have to pay the same for them regardless of how much you use the car. (Pity for me, I've got an 8 year old car with < 30k miles on it.) Parking in the suburbs is subsidized by business owners & the city itself - you can usually park for free, and the price of it is reflected in land values. Gas is the only marginal cost for suburban driving, and I can basically guarantee that Uber costs more than gas does. The marginal cost of driving across Silicon Valley, in gas, is under a dollar.
- yellowbeard 10y ago
  I saw Zuckerberg walking in Palo Alto with wife, child and dog and no security visible just over a year ago. If he has 24/7 security, either they're very discreet or it started recently.
  - cicloid 10y ago
    Probably a very discreet security detail. Not all of them need to be man or have the same haircut.
  - nostrademons 10y ago
    http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/protect-mark-zuckerberg/ http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/protect-mark-zuckerberg/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mark-zuckerberg/12159018/Mark-Zuckerberg-has-16-bodyguards-to-protect-him-at-home.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mark-zuckerberg/121590... I would bet on them being discreet. Good security is very good at making people unaware that security is present. I recall showing my relatives around the Googleplex when I worked there, having my brother-in-law comment on the seeming lack of security for such a high-value target, and then telling him "No, they're there - if you try to walk off with a laptop or take pictures of something you're not supposed to, they'll come running."
fpig 10y ago
I agree about Facebook, but surge pricing is exactly what makes Uber reliable.

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not with surge pricing etc

kristianc 10y ago

The companies as they are today may not be achieving their mission - that doesn't mean that they won't in the future. Facebook has succeeded in making the world a more open and transparent place - people have the ability to share information that matters to them and have people around the world find out about it. There are fewer places around the world for those in power to hide information away now. That's different to whether Facebook as a company is transparent. Uber likewise may or may not be reliable now - surge pricing only ever increases the price of an Uber to the same as the price as a black cab where I live, but it's pretty clear that Uber's ambitions of self driving cars do not include surge pricing.

mememachine 10y ago
Theres no discernable progress towards their mission. Call it what it is, PR puff.

nostrademons 10y ago

So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape any of their results or content, you will be banned quite quickly. Facebook's is "make the world a more open & transparent place", and yet they have done more than any company since AOL to turn the web into a series of walled gardens. Plus Mark Zuckerburg bought the 4 houses adjacent to his so that neighbors couldn't look onto his property, and walks around with a 24/7 security team. Uber's is "make transportation as reliable as running water", but their goal is for people to give up their own cars - which they can use any time, any where, for zero marginal cost - to be at the mercy of Uber's service. Palantir's is "Palantir Technologies is a mission-driven company, and a core component of that mission is protecting our fundamental rights to privacy and civil liberties", and they sell to the CIA so they can spy on you. At the same time, these companies also do many things that actually are in accord with their mission statements. I think that you can reconcile this by realizing that the fundamental imperative for every company is continued existence. Those who fail at this are replaced by those who succeed. The mission statement is a tool to ensure continued existence, because it serves to align & recruit employees with similar values, without which there would be no organization. But when there are other imperatives that are necessary for the company's continued existence, even when they contradict the mission statement, the company's existence takes priority. Hence Google is very strict about their proprietary information, even though their mission is to make all information universally accessible; Facebook wants all content on Facebook, even though they claim to be about making everything open & transparent; Uber wants to make transportation reliable & easy, as long as it's on Uber; and Palantir wants to protect civil liberties only so long as it involves buying Palantir software.

tyre 10y ago
> Uber's is "make transportation as reliable as running > water", but their goal is for people to give up their own > cars - which they can use any time, any where, for zero > marginal cost - to be at the mercy of Uber's service. I'm not sure what car you're driving, but in my experience there is a significant marginal cost. I no longer own a car, exclusively using public transit + Lyft, because I don't want to deal with maintenance, paying for parking, gas, insurance, etc.
- nostrademons 10y ago
  Maintenance, insurance, etc. are largely fixed costs: you have to pay the same for them regardless of how much you use the car. (Pity for me, I've got an 8 year old car with < 30k miles on it.) Parking in the suburbs is subsidized by business owners & the city itself - you can usually park for free, and the price of it is reflected in land values. Gas is the only marginal cost for suburban driving, and I can basically guarantee that Uber costs more than gas does. The marginal cost of driving across Silicon Valley, in gas, is under a dollar.
yellowbeard 10y ago
I saw Zuckerberg walking in Palo Alto with wife, child and dog and no security visible just over a year ago. If he has 24/7 security, either they're very discreet or it started recently.
- cicloid 10y ago
  Probably a very discreet security detail. Not all of them need to be man or have the same haircut.
- nostrademons 10y ago
  http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/protect-mark-zuckerberg/ http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/protect-mark-zuckerberg/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mark-zuckerberg/12159018/Mark-Zuckerberg-has-16-bodyguards-to-protect-him-at-home.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mark-zuckerberg/121590... I would bet on them being discreet. Good security is very good at making people unaware that security is present. I recall showing my relatives around the Googleplex when I worked there, having my brother-in-law comment on the seeming lack of security for such a high-value target, and then telling him "No, they're there - if you try to walk off with a laptop or take pictures of something you're not supposed to, they'll come running."

fpig 10y ago

I agree about Facebook, but surge pricing is exactly what makes Uber reliable.