15 ms·

Said this yesterday in the other Facebook thread, and I'll say it again. Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. If you are an engineer you have p

Said this yesterday in the other Facebook thread, and I'll say it again. Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. If you are an engineer you have plenty of job opportunities available to you and there is no excuse for you to continue contributing your labor and time to a wholly malignant organization. At a certain point one has to ask how we as an industry will start dealing with those who continue to take a paycheck from Facebook even in the face of constant and horrific evidence of wholesale ethical violations and negligence.

justtopost 8y ago
Downvoting this makes it no less true. You are personally reponsible for every project you enable.
chronid 8y ago
So is working at Google, Amazon and probably 90% of the big corps of the world in many sectors - from oil to finance to pharmaceutical to telecommunications and so on. And we can include the government. If you're a subcontrator or sold in body rental (modern IT slavery) you're also in the same position as an employee, so you're enabling their evils. Also, if one of those companies is a client of your company you're also enabling them (or a client of a client of your company? How many layers of separation should exist between you and Walmart before you stop being an accomplice in enabling their abuse of workers?). Your point? Should we stop working in IT and go back to the fields? Also, I fear that HN somewhat forgets the world is not SF, in Europe going to work for Facebook/Google/Amazon is a enormous bump (we're speaking 2-4x) of salary for many people, which in some cases means you can buy an house after 3-4 years even with the crazy rents back in your home country - and that's HUGE. Why should those people spend their time slaving as a subcontractor for yet another TLC/bank trying to squeeze their customers dry at the first occasion while getting 25% the salary and zero benefits? Are those less evil? What needs to happen is that people keep applying pressure so facebook is forced to adapt its business model even if it hits their bottom line - which is already happening apparently.
- enraged_camel 8y ago
  >>in Europe going to work for Facebook/Google/Amazon is a enormous bump (we're speaking 2-4x) of salary for many people, which in some cases means you can buy an house after 3-4 years even with the crazy rents back in your home country - and that's HUGE. So this is how we justify it now? “But it will allow me to buy a house in 3-4 years”?
  - zeth___ 8y ago
    How else can any one justify working for capitalists? I enjoy destroying the environment for future generations so they don't have it too easy?
  - chronid 8y ago
    I was just noting that in other parts of the world (where the average salary nationally for developers is NOT a comfy 60k$) finding alternatives to those companies can be a little bit complex, and for sure no less evil. The "justification" (if you want to call it that way) you are looking for is in the part you forgot to quote and respond to ;)
    - martimarkov 8y ago
      I find it hard to believe that only FB has on office in that country that offers the $60k you are referring to. I work in London and there are a lot of companies that will give close to FB salary if you are a good developer. And yes there are companies that are not as corrupt as FB, Google, Amazon. So I'm wondering (out of curiosity as I can't personally think of any) where in Europe is that happening?
      - eanzenberg 8y ago
        London isn't even EU
        martimarkov 8y ago
        Kinda is buddy. Surpassingly the UK is part of the EU and London being the capital of the UK is part of it. Also EU != Europe
subcosmos 8y ago
I've got several infosec friends at Facebook right now, all new hires, trying to preserve our democracy from attacks. I don't consider them morally bankrupt at all.
- enraged_camel 8y ago
  >>trying to preserve our democracy from attacks Hahaha, thanks, that was a good one.
- lostlogin 8y ago
  How does the fit with Myanmar? It’s hardly a democracy, but is ‘morally bankrupy’ too strong a term for what they have helped create there? And that’s ignoring Cambridge Analytica, the creative accounting for that and the other related scandals.
- chillydawg 8y ago
  The various democracies your friends are protecting are at risk from Facebook et al, not hackers abusing Facebook.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- hobs 8y ago
  It seems like a vast networked trove of everyone's information is doing the opposite of "preserving our democracy from attacks" - its actively enabling it. Minimizing the damage of collecting that information is maybe not directly evil, but helping kick the can down the road to the point where facebook is so deeply networked in our society its unremoveable doesnt seem like a high horse to be riding on.
  - jkchu 8y ago
    your line of reasoning makes it sound like it would be simple for everyone in the world to stop using Facebook or some similar social media platform. I see nothing wrong with trying to improve something that is already well ingrained into human society.
brunoTbear 8y ago
Some of my favorite and most ethical friends work everyday at FB to protect against these kinds of attacks and others. You're making an incredibly global statement about an organization where a more tailored statement would carry your water a lot better.
- zepto 8y ago
  Ethical people can take part in an unethical project until they realize what they are doing. The parent poster is calling on them to do just this with regard to Facebook. There is nothing wrong with that call, and it doesn’t impugn your friends unless they ultimately fail to re-evaluate the company.
  - ethbro 8y ago
    I think treating Facebook as a singular project is the bigger fallacy. What about those who argued for React to move to a more reasonable license? What about those who pushed for open sourcing code and hardware in the first place? Companies at the 25k+ employee size are complex, often internally-disagreeing enterprises. Code may be pure, but resource allocation (programmer time) is political. Of the recent Facebook news (e.g. shadow profile and 2FA phone numbers being used for ad targeting)... "we had bugs in our code" is by far the least ethically problematic.
    - zepto 8y ago
      By your reasoning it would be a fallacy to call any large project unethical. I think that is clearly a fallacy. Nobody is arguing that every individual within Facebook is an unethical person. The argument is that the overall project is unethical and the ethical people within it should take that possibility seriously. For more philosophical background on this idea: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY
      - ethbro 8y ago
        By my reasoning it would be a fallacy to assume that all the members of a large project are unethical, which is exactly what some in the comments are suggesting. And is ridiculous, for anyone who's worked in the real world. We all make ethical compromises, and have worked for companies that made ethical decisions we didn't agree with. That was the crux of the Nuremberg Trials: what portion of an endeavor's ethical decisions can be assigned to an individual. The answer was "more than none, but less than all."
simplify 8y ago
I abhor the phrase "morally bankrupt". Who are you to judge the entirety of someone's moral compass?
- icelancer 8y ago
  Some dude on the Internet who knows better than everyone else.
  - subcosmos 8y ago
    Someday in the future the "Internet Morality Police" will flash their cryptographically signed badges stored on a blockchain
    - paulcole 8y ago
      If you are serious, YC applications are still open.
      - subcosmos 8y ago
        Lol - it is the kind of thing they would waste their money on ;)
- martimarkov 8y ago
  So if ppl are not to judge morality who is then?
  - simplify 8y ago
    I didn't say "don't judge ever". I'm opposing the idea of judging the entirety of someone's moral compass based on so little – in this case, a single point of data.
jamesrcole 8y ago
> Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. [It's] a wholly malignant organization Can you go into your argument for that?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
zeth___ 8y ago
Working in any capitalist organization is morally bankrupt.
- sctb 8y ago
  Since we asked you to please stop starting or feeding flamewars, we've banned the account.
JepZ 8y ago
The more interesting question is: Which large companies are morally worth getting our support?
catoc 8y ago
Working for any company writing code with the purpose of violating the privacy of your users, is ethically questionable indeed. So they are certainly engineers at Facebook doing very questionable things - but not all of them. In general: the more influence you have (via code you write or otherwise via power you are aware you have over people), the more you become ethically accountable for your actions.
furgooswft13 8y ago
Sheesh, why stop there. Let's shame American taxpayers because the government's done some pretty nasty stuff over the years. Just pack up and move to one of those other countries that are all sunshine and puppy dogs. What that's too much? Moving jobs is sooooo much easier, what with changing your healthcare, benefits, probably taking a paycut, losing all the friends and acquaintances you've made, no problem man. And we all know Facebook is the only Pure Evil company in the valley. You could get a job at Google and work on censoring search results for the Chinese government. I hear MSFT is in good graces these days with hacker types, unless you don't like the idea of supporting the Military Industrial Complex, and certainly they would never become as anti-competitive as they were in the 90s if they found themselves in a monopolistic position again. Or you could always work for any number of startups that sell hype, bullshit, and vaporware to get VCs to part with their money. Really if you don't quit your Facebook job and #delete your account you're really no better than Mark Hitlerberg at this point. And you can't hide, we'll find you, and "deal" with you (I hear Twitter mobs are good for shaming these days). Full disclosure: The company I work for does some small contracting work for Facebook, so I guess I'm on the list.
dkrich 8y ago
It's pretty interesting to me how incredibly polarizing the topic of Facebook is on the web. People seem convinced that Facebook is an evil enterprise and has to be stopped and its board, employees, and shareholders should all suffer. At least that's how it seems based on the loudest voices on the web because defending Facebook is a highly unpopular position. But why? Use of the platform is entirely voluntary. Beyond that, what are they doing besides targeting ads at people based on pretty basic info that those users (almost entirely) provided to Facebook of their own free will. Yeah, I know they were found recently to be using "shadow contact info" to target ads. But even that study seems fairly contrived- they had to upload an entire organization's private data without their consent just to prove the point they were making in the article. But even if we all agree that that's bad, so what? Okay, so if they stop using MFA data and shared contact data not necessarily shared by the users to target ads are they suddenly not evil? My guess is that most people would remain unconvinced. I think there's some part of society that just hates the idea of advertising of all kinds. They think they should be able to move through life without having information foisted in front of them without their consent. That's a fine view, but the reality of our society is that it relies on businesses being able to sell and they do that largely by advertising to consumers. I also think a lot of the lament comes from the idea that using these platforms is a waste of time, which obviously is more of a personal value judgment call. But above all this, I believe Facebook is hated because it's powerful. But it's powerful because people the world over use it and use it a lot. And that doesn't seem to be changing at all based on Facebook's last several earnings reports. People seem convinced that everyone should agree that Facebook and targeted advertising is evil and the use of the platform isn't worth the trade-offs. And yet people don't care. That stubborn fact. People just simply do not care about having their phone numbers, ages, political beliefs, genders and interests used to target ads at them. Lots of people can't wrap their minds around that fact- that not everyone is so concerned about using that info for ad targeting. Some fraction of the active FB user base probably does care- but not enough to delete the app and stop using it. "Your actions speak so loudly that I cannot hear what you say."
- nialv7 8y ago
  > Use of the platform is entirely voluntary No it's not. Do you know Facebook creates shadow profiles of you by tracking your online activities? Even if you discount that, what about when all your friends use Facebook? Then you are going to be forced into a situation where you either use Facebook or stay disconnected from you friends.
jim777 8y ago
Man this post made me angry. Being human is a morally brankrupt position. Accumulating wealth is a morally brankrupt pastime. If you want to be a morally pure human, starve yourself -- that's the only way.
- avip 8y ago
  Starving yourself is undoubtedly morally bankrupt, especially so if you have elderly parents or young kids or random loved ones or dependants in general. Not by accident killing oneself is considered a primary sin in many mainstream religions.
  - paulcole 8y ago
    Oh, well if the mainstream religions think it’s bad surely it must be.
- 1000units 8y ago
  I've always liked this line, even after becoming quite wealthy: And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. --Matthew 19:24
  - dylan604 8y ago
    When I first heard this as a kid, I immediately thought about a real life camel attempting to fit through the hole for thread in a sewing needle. That seemed like a very odd comparison as to who would try to do such an odd thing? As an adult, I heard someone talk about one of the gates in the wall to Jerusalem was named the "eye of the needle" because of its shape. If a camel was loaded up that exceeded a certain height, the camel could not fit through the gate. It was this situation that the biblical passage was supposedly referring. So as with most things, context really helped. </random_tangent>
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
ankimal 8y ago
Its a free world and last I checked its not illegal to work for FB. Trust in market forces to take it course.
- ahartmetz 8y ago
  People making decisions create market forces.
remote_phone 8y ago
I would love to know where you work that is so morally upstanding and globally beneficial. More than likely you’re just a hypocrite.
- pdeuchler 8y ago
  I am extremely imperfect and a hypocrite on many levels. I never practice what I preach, and if I'm being honest I can't say what I'd do if I had an offer from a company like Facebook or Google that promised to completely change my financial situation. I don't pretend to be better than anyone who has been in that situation and decided that the money was worth it. I'm not better than people who took the job because of the career opportunities, the social cache of working at a FAANG, or the chance at working with one of the world's richest datasets on the world's most powerful computers with some of the world's brightest minds. It would be a fair critique to say that my pronouncement smacks of self-righteousness borne of a moral framework that's never been challenged. Like a rich man who chastises the poor for stealing to feed their families, it's easy for me to moralize. But, I do know that working for companies that are funded by advertising makes me feel uneasy. I know because I've worked at one or two. I also know that the company I currently work for charges our customers for the services provided, and I know there's a consensual quid pro quo in every customer agreement. I also know we don't track our customers beyond their consent. I would hope if my company ever started doing that I'd speak up, and if things didn't change I would hope to have the fortitude to leave and continue to speak up outside of the company. I also have no doubt that my day to day work is automating away someone's job, somewhere. Where someone used to make a good living, my code will run instead. People might not get overtly laid off because of my code, but there's no doubt people who use my company's services hire less people... it's kind of the point. I definitely think about the moral implications of that. Sometimes I'm not super comfortable with the hypothetical effects of my code over a long time period. Even if I contribute less than 1% to my company's service, if my company's service saves our customers on average the equivalent of one salary a year I've been responsible for the, at best, lack of creation of hundreds of jobs. In a different world someone fed a family, bought a house, and lived a life with one of those salaries, and now that opportunity is forever gone. Sometimes that's a hard thing to grapple with, and I really hope that I'm not contributing to negative economic trends that hurt a large majority of the world's populace while enriching myself. Chances are I probably am, though. However I am certain of a couple things. The mass collection of billions of people's information is putting upon yourself an incredible responsibility that I find hard to justify. This wasn't by accident, this wasn't dumb luck, this was a purposeful attempt to amass and control power. This power isn't inherently good or evil itself, but even in a vacuum one has a right to be suspicious of such power. Fortunately we don't live in a vacuum and over time Facebook has shown itself to not be a good steward of the power it's created. I have no doubt there are plenty of ethical people that work at Facebook, and there are definitely plenty of ethical, smart people who work in Facebook infosec. I don't blame them for the data breach. I blame the creator of this Pandora's box, I blame those who willingly continue the abuse of this power, I blame those who purposefully profit off the abuse of this power, and I blame those who refuse to realize that they will not change an organization that refuses to change. Until the use of Facebook's data is no longer rewarded with massive amounts of money Facebook will continue to collect and sell this data. The incentives are very clearly aligned. Working there, no matter your intentions, cannot change these incentives. I'm not saying everyone at Facebook is evil, but if the hiring reputation is true they are too smart to not understand these things for much longer. Facebook will continue to be morally bankrupt until its power is abolished or democratized, and since a Pandora's box cannot be closed I'll settle for democratized.
Verdex_3 8y ago
We as an industry? Look friend. If I lose my job, you aren't going to do anything to augment my lack of income. You're not going to do anything to provide health insurance. And you're not going to do anything to help me find new employment. There is no "We". Here's an idea. If this topic is something that you feel is important, then perhaps you can set aside half your income to a general fund to help provide benefits for employees who leave facebook for morality reasons. Maybe if it gets enough momentum others will also provide funds. Given enough time perhaps this will help the "industry" to become more ethical. You know what's not going to convince anyone to leave facebook now? Trying to setup some sort of ad hoc lynch mob to "deal" with people who are trying to pay a mortgage.
- holtalanm 8y ago
  this needs so many up-votes. gots ta pay the bills yo.
- confounded 8y ago
  Job options for ex-Facebook employees are extremely good, at least the technical ones.
- HatchedLake721 8y ago
  Exactly this. Decline a 3x paying job, there’s another 1000 developers behind in line. You take a loss on personal income, Facebook carries on being Facebook, and nothing will change, except having less money in your bank account. That’s not how you change the world.
NewEntryHN 8y ago
There are plenty of opportunities to discuss the ethics of Facebook, but them suffering a data breach is not one.
- ddebernardy 8y ago
  OT but FYI the NRA reacts the same way as you just did with gun ownership and school shootings. If you agree with that it's cool (/s), but just saying...
kartan 8y ago
> Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. Facebook offers a service that people wants. A service that is not morally bad, if any connecting people is a positive thing. The monetization of that business is what has proven problematic. As it is offered for free, it is people's privacy what is being sold. Who should solve it? The problem with "just don't work for Facebook" is that it shifts the responsibility to policy companies from governments, that have the power and resources, to individuals that have not. Of course individuals have a moral responsibility, and that is why whistle-blowers are so important in all industries. But it is the government that has the responsibility to assure that the industry remains a positive force in the country. Tech giants are a new phenomenon. Regulations have not still catch up with its problems. But governments around the globe need to shape up and get up to the challenge of letting companies offer services that people wants and needs while minimizing the harmful impact that some business models have. If you do not like the ethics of the company that you work for, change jobs. You are going to be happier. But that is not going to make the company more ethical, if any it is going to be less ethical as people that worries about such things move out.
- joefkelley 8y ago
  > Facebook offers a service that people wants. A service that is not morally bad, if any connecting people is a positive thing. People also want heroin. That doesn't mean it's actually a positive thing in people's lives. If anything the evidence is mounting that it is negative, e.g.: https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-the-more-you-use-facebook-the-worse-you-feel https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-t... I mostly agree with the rest of your post, though. I believe it's possible, though very rare, to work at Facebook and have a positive impact. And there's definitely a total mismatch between regulation and the realities of big tech companies. I'm skeptical of government regulation solving privacy issues specifically (I think that stems more from a widespread cultural misunderstanding or unawareness of privacy concerns) but maybe it's needed for other ways these companies are negatively impacting the world.
mmaunder 8y ago
Repent ye sinner and come join us in cybersecurity. ;-)
hak8or 8y ago
What if I am totally fine working on that stuff if it means more money? Hell, I would be totally content working on weapons for the military if it means more money and interesting problems. I am aur enany others would too.
buboard 8y ago
he who is without sin ...
gist 8y ago
> start dealing with those who continue to take a paycheck from Facebook even in the face of constant and horrific evidence of wholesale ethical violations and negligence Do you also suggest that someone should no longer be friends with anyone who uses that Facebook platform and is 'the product'? What about that? That is support as well. Right?
ilovecaching 8y ago
How is this not being flagged by a mod? This is just a slanderous attack on people who work at Facebook. HN is supposed to be a place for intellectual conversation and instead we have someone telling people that if they don't quit their job they are malignant scum of the earth. Of course it's at the top to. If you think Facebook is cesspool, HN is no better.
shados 8y ago
For better or worse, a lot of people can distance themselves from what the company does. I used to work as a software engineer for one of the largest banks in the world...The department I worked in had exactly zero to do with money, I never got close to a customer, I never had to deal with an account of any kind. It was a really cool gig, too. With as big as Facebook is, a lot of people (the majority?) are not directly connected to all the crap you see in the news. Sure, you can say they contribute to it, and you'd be totally correct...but Im sure what they see is a bunch of smart people working on cool technology with a good salary and free lunch. So yeah, its probably "morally corrupt", no denying it, but so's the majority of companies that hire more than 50 people, one way or another. You have to work somewhere. Then you have people who are trying to do the right thing from the inside. I knew someone who worked for Google purely to try and change its culture. The paycheck probably didn't hurt. There's a lot of these people.
QML 8y ago
This is a very typical Silicon Valley mindset where the number of high paying software engineering positions is abundant, and there’s no shortage of work. If you look outside the Bay Area, I’m sure you will find people who desperate enough and would sacrifice any sense of morals they have for a $100k job. It’s as simple as that.
Balgair 8y ago
"The Universe is a morally hazardous place" -Ribbonfarm The issue is that there is not a 'universal' set of morals for tech people, especially as tech has started to become a more accessible profession. I'll agree, personally, that the ethics of working with FB may have issues, large ones at that (Rohingya comes to mind). But, and correct me if I am wrong, are you are advocating for a medical board/ the bar / ASME / professional engineer type of organization? Generally, those organizational types also have ethical issues too, but they tend to be a lot more nuanced and not as glaring.

justtopost 8y ago

Downvoting this makes it no less true. You are personally reponsible for every project you enable.

chronid 8y ago

So is working at Google, Amazon and probably 90% of the big corps of the world in many sectors - from oil to finance to pharmaceutical to telecommunications and so on. And we can include the government. If you're a subcontrator or sold in body rental (modern IT slavery) you're also in the same position as an employee, so you're enabling their evils. Also, if one of those companies is a client of your company you're also enabling them (or a client of a client of your company? How many layers of separation should exist between you and Walmart before you stop being an accomplice in enabling their abuse of workers?). Your point? Should we stop working in IT and go back to the fields? Also, I fear that HN somewhat forgets the world is not SF, in Europe going to work for Facebook/Google/Amazon is a enormous bump (we're speaking 2-4x) of salary for many people, which in some cases means you can buy an house after 3-4 years even with the crazy rents back in your home country - and that's HUGE. Why should those people spend their time slaving as a subcontractor for yet another TLC/bank trying to squeeze their customers dry at the first occasion while getting 25% the salary and zero benefits? Are those less evil? What needs to happen is that people keep applying pressure so facebook is forced to adapt its business model even if it hits their bottom line - which is already happening apparently.

enraged_camel 8y ago
>>in Europe going to work for Facebook/Google/Amazon is a enormous bump (we're speaking 2-4x) of salary for many people, which in some cases means you can buy an house after 3-4 years even with the crazy rents back in your home country - and that's HUGE. So this is how we justify it now? “But it will allow me to buy a house in 3-4 years”?
- zeth___ 8y ago
  How else can any one justify working for capitalists? I enjoy destroying the environment for future generations so they don't have it too easy?
- chronid 8y ago
  I was just noting that in other parts of the world (where the average salary nationally for developers is NOT a comfy 60k$) finding alternatives to those companies can be a little bit complex, and for sure no less evil. The "justification" (if you want to call it that way) you are looking for is in the part you forgot to quote and respond to ;)
  - martimarkov 8y ago
    I find it hard to believe that only FB has on office in that country that offers the $60k you are referring to. I work in London and there are a lot of companies that will give close to FB salary if you are a good developer. And yes there are companies that are not as corrupt as FB, Google, Amazon. So I'm wondering (out of curiosity as I can't personally think of any) where in Europe is that happening?
    - eanzenberg 8y ago
      London isn't even EU
      - martimarkov 8y ago
        Kinda is buddy. Surpassingly the UK is part of the EU and London being the capital of the UK is part of it. Also EU != Europe

subcosmos 8y ago

I've got several infosec friends at Facebook right now, all new hires, trying to preserve our democracy from attacks. I don't consider them morally bankrupt at all.

enraged_camel 8y ago
>>trying to preserve our democracy from attacks Hahaha, thanks, that was a good one.
lostlogin 8y ago
How does the fit with Myanmar? It’s hardly a democracy, but is ‘morally bankrupy’ too strong a term for what they have helped create there? And that’s ignoring Cambridge Analytica, the creative accounting for that and the other related scandals.
chillydawg 8y ago
The various democracies your friends are protecting are at risk from Facebook et al, not hackers abusing Facebook.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
hobs 8y ago
It seems like a vast networked trove of everyone's information is doing the opposite of "preserving our democracy from attacks" - its actively enabling it. Minimizing the damage of collecting that information is maybe not directly evil, but helping kick the can down the road to the point where facebook is so deeply networked in our society its unremoveable doesnt seem like a high horse to be riding on.
- jkchu 8y ago
  your line of reasoning makes it sound like it would be simple for everyone in the world to stop using Facebook or some similar social media platform. I see nothing wrong with trying to improve something that is already well ingrained into human society.

brunoTbear 8y ago

Some of my favorite and most ethical friends work everyday at FB to protect against these kinds of attacks and others. You're making an incredibly global statement about an organization where a more tailored statement would carry your water a lot better.

zepto 8y ago
Ethical people can take part in an unethical project until they realize what they are doing. The parent poster is calling on them to do just this with regard to Facebook. There is nothing wrong with that call, and it doesn’t impugn your friends unless they ultimately fail to re-evaluate the company.
- ethbro 8y ago
  I think treating Facebook as a singular project is the bigger fallacy. What about those who argued for React to move to a more reasonable license? What about those who pushed for open sourcing code and hardware in the first place? Companies at the 25k+ employee size are complex, often internally-disagreeing enterprises. Code may be pure, but resource allocation (programmer time) is political. Of the recent Facebook news (e.g. shadow profile and 2FA phone numbers being used for ad targeting)... "we had bugs in our code" is by far the least ethically problematic.
  - zepto 8y ago
    By your reasoning it would be a fallacy to call any large project unethical. I think that is clearly a fallacy. Nobody is arguing that every individual within Facebook is an unethical person. The argument is that the overall project is unethical and the ethical people within it should take that possibility seriously. For more philosophical background on this idea: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY
    - ethbro 8y ago
      By my reasoning it would be a fallacy to assume that all the members of a large project are unethical, which is exactly what some in the comments are suggesting. And is ridiculous, for anyone who's worked in the real world. We all make ethical compromises, and have worked for companies that made ethical decisions we didn't agree with. That was the crux of the Nuremberg Trials: what portion of an endeavor's ethical decisions can be assigned to an individual. The answer was "more than none, but less than all."

simplify 8y ago

I abhor the phrase "morally bankrupt". Who are you to judge the entirety of someone's moral compass?

icelancer 8y ago
Some dude on the Internet who knows better than everyone else.
- subcosmos 8y ago
  Someday in the future the "Internet Morality Police" will flash their cryptographically signed badges stored on a blockchain
  - paulcole 8y ago
    If you are serious, YC applications are still open.
    - subcosmos 8y ago
      Lol - it is the kind of thing they would waste their money on ;)
martimarkov 8y ago
So if ppl are not to judge morality who is then?
- simplify 8y ago
  I didn't say "don't judge ever". I'm opposing the idea of judging the entirety of someone's moral compass based on so little – in this case, a single point of data.

jamesrcole 8y ago

> Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. [It's] a wholly malignant organization Can you go into your argument for that?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

zeth___ 8y ago

Working in any capitalist organization is morally bankrupt.

sctb 8y ago
Since we asked you to please stop starting or feeding flamewars, we've banned the account.

JepZ 8y ago

The more interesting question is: Which large companies are morally worth getting our support?

catoc 8y ago

Working for any company writing code with the purpose of violating the privacy of your users, is ethically questionable indeed. So they are certainly engineers at Facebook doing very questionable things - but not all of them. In general: the more influence you have (via code you write or otherwise via power you are aware you have over people), the more you become ethically accountable for your actions.

furgooswft13 8y ago

Sheesh, why stop there. Let's shame American taxpayers because the government's done some pretty nasty stuff over the years. Just pack up and move to one of those other countries that are all sunshine and puppy dogs. What that's too much? Moving jobs is sooooo much easier, what with changing your healthcare, benefits, probably taking a paycut, losing all the friends and acquaintances you've made, no problem man. And we all know Facebook is the only Pure Evil company in the valley. You could get a job at Google and work on censoring search results for the Chinese government. I hear MSFT is in good graces these days with hacker types, unless you don't like the idea of supporting the Military Industrial Complex, and certainly they would never become as anti-competitive as they were in the 90s if they found themselves in a monopolistic position again. Or you could always work for any number of startups that sell hype, bullshit, and vaporware to get VCs to part with their money. Really if you don't quit your Facebook job and #delete your account you're really no better than Mark Hitlerberg at this point. And you can't hide, we'll find you, and "deal" with you (I hear Twitter mobs are good for shaming these days). Full disclosure: The company I work for does some small contracting work for Facebook, so I guess I'm on the list.

dkrich 8y ago

It's pretty interesting to me how incredibly polarizing the topic of Facebook is on the web. People seem convinced that Facebook is an evil enterprise and has to be stopped and its board, employees, and shareholders should all suffer. At least that's how it seems based on the loudest voices on the web because defending Facebook is a highly unpopular position. But why? Use of the platform is entirely voluntary. Beyond that, what are they doing besides targeting ads at people based on pretty basic info that those users (almost entirely) provided to Facebook of their own free will. Yeah, I know they were found recently to be using "shadow contact info" to target ads. But even that study seems fairly contrived- they had to upload an entire organization's private data without their consent just to prove the point they were making in the article. But even if we all agree that that's bad, so what? Okay, so if they stop using MFA data and shared contact data not necessarily shared by the users to target ads are they suddenly not evil? My guess is that most people would remain unconvinced. I think there's some part of society that just hates the idea of advertising of all kinds. They think they should be able to move through life without having information foisted in front of them without their consent. That's a fine view, but the reality of our society is that it relies on businesses being able to sell and they do that largely by advertising to consumers. I also think a lot of the lament comes from the idea that using these platforms is a waste of time, which obviously is more of a personal value judgment call. But above all this, I believe Facebook is hated because it's powerful. But it's powerful because people the world over use it and use it a lot. And that doesn't seem to be changing at all based on Facebook's last several earnings reports. People seem convinced that everyone should agree that Facebook and targeted advertising is evil and the use of the platform isn't worth the trade-offs. And yet people don't care. That stubborn fact. People just simply do not care about having their phone numbers, ages, political beliefs, genders and interests used to target ads at them. Lots of people can't wrap their minds around that fact- that not everyone is so concerned about using that info for ad targeting. Some fraction of the active FB user base probably does care- but not enough to delete the app and stop using it. "Your actions speak so loudly that I cannot hear what you say."

nialv7 8y ago
> Use of the platform is entirely voluntary No it's not. Do you know Facebook creates shadow profiles of you by tracking your online activities? Even if you discount that, what about when all your friends use Facebook? Then you are going to be forced into a situation where you either use Facebook or stay disconnected from you friends.

jim777 8y ago

Man this post made me angry. Being human is a morally brankrupt position. Accumulating wealth is a morally brankrupt pastime. If you want to be a morally pure human, starve yourself -- that's the only way.

avip 8y ago
Starving yourself is undoubtedly morally bankrupt, especially so if you have elderly parents or young kids or random loved ones or dependants in general. Not by accident killing oneself is considered a primary sin in many mainstream religions.
- paulcole 8y ago
  Oh, well if the mainstream religions think it’s bad surely it must be.
1000units 8y ago
I've always liked this line, even after becoming quite wealthy: And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. --Matthew 19:24
- dylan604 8y ago
  When I first heard this as a kid, I immediately thought about a real life camel attempting to fit through the hole for thread in a sewing needle. That seemed like a very odd comparison as to who would try to do such an odd thing? As an adult, I heard someone talk about one of the gates in the wall to Jerusalem was named the "eye of the needle" because of its shape. If a camel was loaded up that exceeded a certain height, the camel could not fit through the gate. It was this situation that the biblical passage was supposedly referring. So as with most things, context really helped. </random_tangent>
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

ankimal 8y ago

Its a free world and last I checked its not illegal to work for FB. Trust in market forces to take it course.

ahartmetz 8y ago
People making decisions create market forces.

remote_phone 8y ago

I would love to know where you work that is so morally upstanding and globally beneficial. More than likely you’re just a hypocrite.

pdeuchler 8y ago
I am extremely imperfect and a hypocrite on many levels. I never practice what I preach, and if I'm being honest I can't say what I'd do if I had an offer from a company like Facebook or Google that promised to completely change my financial situation. I don't pretend to be better than anyone who has been in that situation and decided that the money was worth it. I'm not better than people who took the job because of the career opportunities, the social cache of working at a FAANG, or the chance at working with one of the world's richest datasets on the world's most powerful computers with some of the world's brightest minds. It would be a fair critique to say that my pronouncement smacks of self-righteousness borne of a moral framework that's never been challenged. Like a rich man who chastises the poor for stealing to feed their families, it's easy for me to moralize. But, I do know that working for companies that are funded by advertising makes me feel uneasy. I know because I've worked at one or two. I also know that the company I currently work for charges our customers for the services provided, and I know there's a consensual quid pro quo in every customer agreement. I also know we don't track our customers beyond their consent. I would hope if my company ever started doing that I'd speak up, and if things didn't change I would hope to have the fortitude to leave and continue to speak up outside of the company. I also have no doubt that my day to day work is automating away someone's job, somewhere. Where someone used to make a good living, my code will run instead. People might not get overtly laid off because of my code, but there's no doubt people who use my company's services hire less people... it's kind of the point. I definitely think about the moral implications of that. Sometimes I'm not super comfortable with the hypothetical effects of my code over a long time period. Even if I contribute less than 1% to my company's service, if my company's service saves our customers on average the equivalent of one salary a year I've been responsible for the, at best, lack of creation of hundreds of jobs. In a different world someone fed a family, bought a house, and lived a life with one of those salaries, and now that opportunity is forever gone. Sometimes that's a hard thing to grapple with, and I really hope that I'm not contributing to negative economic trends that hurt a large majority of the world's populace while enriching myself. Chances are I probably am, though. However I am certain of a couple things. The mass collection of billions of people's information is putting upon yourself an incredible responsibility that I find hard to justify. This wasn't by accident, this wasn't dumb luck, this was a purposeful attempt to amass and control power. This power isn't inherently good or evil itself, but even in a vacuum one has a right to be suspicious of such power. Fortunately we don't live in a vacuum and over time Facebook has shown itself to not be a good steward of the power it's created. I have no doubt there are plenty of ethical people that work at Facebook, and there are definitely plenty of ethical, smart people who work in Facebook infosec. I don't blame them for the data breach. I blame the creator of this Pandora's box, I blame those who willingly continue the abuse of this power, I blame those who purposefully profit off the abuse of this power, and I blame those who refuse to realize that they will not change an organization that refuses to change. Until the use of Facebook's data is no longer rewarded with massive amounts of money Facebook will continue to collect and sell this data. The incentives are very clearly aligned. Working there, no matter your intentions, cannot change these incentives. I'm not saying everyone at Facebook is evil, but if the hiring reputation is true they are too smart to not understand these things for much longer. Facebook will continue to be morally bankrupt until its power is abolished or democratized, and since a Pandora's box cannot be closed I'll settle for democratized.

Verdex_3 8y ago

We as an industry? Look friend. If I lose my job, you aren't going to do anything to augment my lack of income. You're not going to do anything to provide health insurance. And you're not going to do anything to help me find new employment. There is no "We". Here's an idea. If this topic is something that you feel is important, then perhaps you can set aside half your income to a general fund to help provide benefits for employees who leave facebook for morality reasons. Maybe if it gets enough momentum others will also provide funds. Given enough time perhaps this will help the "industry" to become more ethical. You know what's not going to convince anyone to leave facebook now? Trying to setup some sort of ad hoc lynch mob to "deal" with people who are trying to pay a mortgage.

holtalanm 8y ago
this needs so many up-votes. gots ta pay the bills yo.
confounded 8y ago
Job options for ex-Facebook employees are extremely good, at least the technical ones.
HatchedLake721 8y ago
Exactly this. Decline a 3x paying job, there’s another 1000 developers behind in line. You take a loss on personal income, Facebook carries on being Facebook, and nothing will change, except having less money in your bank account. That’s not how you change the world.

NewEntryHN 8y ago

There are plenty of opportunities to discuss the ethics of Facebook, but them suffering a data breach is not one.

ddebernardy 8y ago
OT but FYI the NRA reacts the same way as you just did with gun ownership and school shootings. If you agree with that it's cool (/s), but just saying...

kartan 8y ago

> Working for Facebook is a morally bankrupt position. Facebook offers a service that people wants. A service that is not morally bad, if any connecting people is a positive thing. The monetization of that business is what has proven problematic. As it is offered for free, it is people's privacy what is being sold. Who should solve it? The problem with "just don't work for Facebook" is that it shifts the responsibility to policy companies from governments, that have the power and resources, to individuals that have not. Of course individuals have a moral responsibility, and that is why whistle-blowers are so important in all industries. But it is the government that has the responsibility to assure that the industry remains a positive force in the country. Tech giants are a new phenomenon. Regulations have not still catch up with its problems. But governments around the globe need to shape up and get up to the challenge of letting companies offer services that people wants and needs while minimizing the harmful impact that some business models have. If you do not like the ethics of the company that you work for, change jobs. You are going to be happier. But that is not going to make the company more ethical, if any it is going to be less ethical as people that worries about such things move out.

joefkelley 8y ago
> Facebook offers a service that people wants. A service that is not morally bad, if any connecting people is a positive thing. People also want heroin. That doesn't mean it's actually a positive thing in people's lives. If anything the evidence is mounting that it is negative, e.g.: https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-the-more-you-use-facebook-the-worse-you-feel https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-t... I mostly agree with the rest of your post, though. I believe it's possible, though very rare, to work at Facebook and have a positive impact. And there's definitely a total mismatch between regulation and the realities of big tech companies. I'm skeptical of government regulation solving privacy issues specifically (I think that stems more from a widespread cultural misunderstanding or unawareness of privacy concerns) but maybe it's needed for other ways these companies are negatively impacting the world.

mmaunder 8y ago

Repent ye sinner and come join us in cybersecurity. ;-)

hak8or 8y ago

What if I am totally fine working on that stuff if it means more money? Hell, I would be totally content working on weapons for the military if it means more money and interesting problems. I am aur enany others would too.

buboard 8y ago

he who is without sin ...

gist 8y ago

> start dealing with those who continue to take a paycheck from Facebook even in the face of constant and horrific evidence of wholesale ethical violations and negligence Do you also suggest that someone should no longer be friends with anyone who uses that Facebook platform and is 'the product'? What about that? That is support as well. Right?

ilovecaching 8y ago

How is this not being flagged by a mod? This is just a slanderous attack on people who work at Facebook. HN is supposed to be a place for intellectual conversation and instead we have someone telling people that if they don't quit their job they are malignant scum of the earth. Of course it's at the top to. If you think Facebook is cesspool, HN is no better.

shados 8y ago

For better or worse, a lot of people can distance themselves from what the company does. I used to work as a software engineer for one of the largest banks in the world...The department I worked in had exactly zero to do with money, I never got close to a customer, I never had to deal with an account of any kind. It was a really cool gig, too. With as big as Facebook is, a lot of people (the majority?) are not directly connected to all the crap you see in the news. Sure, you can say they contribute to it, and you'd be totally correct...but Im sure what they see is a bunch of smart people working on cool technology with a good salary and free lunch. So yeah, its probably "morally corrupt", no denying it, but so's the majority of companies that hire more than 50 people, one way or another. You have to work somewhere. Then you have people who are trying to do the right thing from the inside. I knew someone who worked for Google purely to try and change its culture. The paycheck probably didn't hurt. There's a lot of these people.

QML 8y ago

This is a very typical Silicon Valley mindset where the number of high paying software engineering positions is abundant, and there’s no shortage of work. If you look outside the Bay Area, I’m sure you will find people who desperate enough and would sacrifice any sense of morals they have for a $100k job. It’s as simple as that.

Balgair 8y ago

"The Universe is a morally hazardous place" -Ribbonfarm The issue is that there is not a 'universal' set of morals for tech people, especially as tech has started to become a more accessible profession. I'll agree, personally, that the ethics of working with FB may have issues, large ones at that (Rohingya comes to mind). But, and correct me if I am wrong, are you are advocating for a medical board/ the bar / ASME / professional engineer type of organization? Generally, those organizational types also have ethical issues too, but they tend to be a lot more nuanced and not as glaring.