This seems at odds with the photo in the OP linked article (referenced by the quote in my comment), as well as any other similar photos of what the physical wor

This seems at odds with the photo in the OP linked article (referenced by the quote in my comment), as well as any other similar photos of what the physical work spaces are like. I mean, it seems like indisputable evidence based on the physical structure of the work space. I don't see how there's a way to interpret photographic depictions of the actual Facebook offices in some other way. It's like saying, "See this picture of a work space that indisputably shows it to be a grotesque panopticon? ... well, trust me, it's not a panopticon." Is the picture a forgery or something?