4 ms·

I agree. It was individual employees who violated the agreement - if it makes Facebook employees actually think about their actions then overall it’s a good thi

I agree. It was individual employees who violated the agreement - if it makes Facebook employees actually think about their actions then overall it’s a good thing. It’s gotten to the point where I start to ask myself - if you work or Facebook, are you a good person? My personal opinion is that you might be, but you are likely are not.

jakear 8y ago
This reminds me of the saying way back in 2016 American elections: “If you vote for Trump, it doesn’t mean that you’re not a good person, but it does mean that someone being a bad person isn’t a deal breaker for your support” I think that sentence could start off with “If you work for Zuck...” just as well.
- gyaniv 8y ago
  Definitely agree. I know good people working for Facebook, but it does make me think "After everything you know about Facebook, the fact you would still work there, makes me respect you a lot less"
- notacoward 8y ago
  This is true, but doesn't mean what most think it does because it doesn't address knowledge/belief about whether someone's bad. Someone could vote for Trump because they're an idiot. To an extent that's true of working for Zuck as well, except that Facebook has a much more rigorous interview process than the White House. While it's not good to be an idiot, it's not the same as being amoral and I think that's what most people read in the original statement. Consider these alternatives. "If you vote for Trump and know he's bad..." "...it does mean that the possibility of someone being a bad person..." Not quite the same, eh?
- coldtea 8y ago
  Or the person is not 15 years old, and doesn't believe there are "good persons" in politics, or that the alternatives (in GOP or Dems) were better people. Or the person goes even further, and doesn't believe the puritan tenet that "good person == good politician". There were excellent politicians that were bad in their behavior, and vice versa. E.g. the person might care more about not encouraging a hawkish member of the establishment, that continued to beat the drum of American supremacy and threatened even more wars and tension coming on (e.g. with Iran) -- compared to merely voting someone who is e.g. sexist (as if that matters for the kind of decisions a President takes).
  - jakear 8y ago
    Being sexist doesn’t matter for the kinds of decisions a president makes? Excuse me? Supreme Court justice nominations, for instance? In fact, the Supreme Court invalidates your entrie argument, because guess what: I want people I think are “good people” to be in charge of interpreting the constitution. I think everybody can agree with that.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >Being sexist doesn’t matter for the kinds of decisions a president makes? Excuse me? Supreme Court justice nominations, for instance? Yeah, it doesn't matter. Worse case you get more male justices. What do you really expect will happen? Some justice will be unpointed which will undo women's voting rights or equality laws? >In fact, the Supreme Court invalidates your entrie argument, because guess what: I want people I think are “good people” to be in charge of interpreting the constitution. I think everybody can agree with that. Well, I don't agree with that. I would not care less if one of my "constitutional interpreters" drinks, takes cocaine, or has extra marital affairs for example. I only care that the direction they take the law is good. There have been legendary lawmakers and politicians that had all kinds of personal vices. Then again, I'm not American, so I don't have the puritan trait. You guys managed to have a problem with the personal life of MLK too. Nobody in Europe would even think to ask such a BS question: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-honor-Dr-Martin-Luther-King-Jr-in-such-a-glorious-way-when-as-a-married-man-he-had-multiple-extramarital-affairs https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-honor-Dr-Martin-Luther-King-...
      - jakear 8y ago
        Given that’s exactly what has happened, yes I do think that’s what would happen. I’m sure even as a non-American you’re aware of Brett Kavanaugh and his potential effect on abortion law. And I don’t care what they do in their personal life either. I care about how those things will effect they laws the pass: if someone drinks and does cocaine and has extramarital affairs, but doesn’t fuck over women/minorities, I’m all for them. If someone does the opposite, I’m against them.
  - 8y ago
blattimwind 8y ago
"It was individual employees who violated the agreement" How do you know this? Facebook invested well over a hundred million dollars into this particular app, I would have to hear some very compelling arguments to see this episode as "misconduct of individual employees". That being said I agree with the stance on thinking before doing, it's just that I don't believe that Facebooks operational conduct is rooted in individual employees, but rather in their company culture, values and leadership.
- detaro 8y ago
  I don't think that's the parents point, but instead that inside the "blob" Facebook individuals have made the decisions, and bear direct responsibility for what happened. "Company culture" doesn't absolve the individual.
  - blattimwind 8y ago
    Absolutely and I wouldn't want to imply so.
save_ferris 8y ago
One wonders what actually would effect change on the part of Facebook. Clearly the market doesn't care about the ethical lapses beyond the major initial headlines. The truth is that Facebook wouldn't be able to get away with a lot this if they didn't have an incredibly talented engineering division. And even though most individuals aren't making these terrible decisions, they definitely support them through their work. If Facebook becomes an unattractive destination due to the social cost of working there, that might bring about change.
deepspace 8y ago
I have been saying for a long time that out industry needs an ethical code of conduct. And employees who willingly work for companies acting unethically should be shunned throughout the industry. Imagine a world where people knew that having Facebook or SCO or Palantir on your resume meant automatic rejection by any company subscribing to the code of conduct. Unethical companies would face huge pressure from their own workforce to clean up their act.

jakear 8y ago

This reminds me of the saying way back in 2016 American elections: “If you vote for Trump, it doesn’t mean that you’re not a good person, but it does mean that someone being a bad person isn’t a deal breaker for your support” I think that sentence could start off with “If you work for Zuck...” just as well.

gyaniv 8y ago
Definitely agree. I know good people working for Facebook, but it does make me think "After everything you know about Facebook, the fact you would still work there, makes me respect you a lot less"
notacoward 8y ago
This is true, but doesn't mean what most think it does because it doesn't address knowledge/belief about whether someone's bad. Someone could vote for Trump because they're an idiot. To an extent that's true of working for Zuck as well, except that Facebook has a much more rigorous interview process than the White House. While it's not good to be an idiot, it's not the same as being amoral and I think that's what most people read in the original statement. Consider these alternatives. "If you vote for Trump and know he's bad..." "...it does mean that the possibility of someone being a bad person..." Not quite the same, eh?
coldtea 8y ago
Or the person is not 15 years old, and doesn't believe there are "good persons" in politics, or that the alternatives (in GOP or Dems) were better people. Or the person goes even further, and doesn't believe the puritan tenet that "good person == good politician". There were excellent politicians that were bad in their behavior, and vice versa. E.g. the person might care more about not encouraging a hawkish member of the establishment, that continued to beat the drum of American supremacy and threatened even more wars and tension coming on (e.g. with Iran) -- compared to merely voting someone who is e.g. sexist (as if that matters for the kind of decisions a President takes).
- jakear 8y ago
  Being sexist doesn’t matter for the kinds of decisions a president makes? Excuse me? Supreme Court justice nominations, for instance? In fact, the Supreme Court invalidates your entrie argument, because guess what: I want people I think are “good people” to be in charge of interpreting the constitution. I think everybody can agree with that.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Being sexist doesn’t matter for the kinds of decisions a president makes? Excuse me? Supreme Court justice nominations, for instance? Yeah, it doesn't matter. Worse case you get more male justices. What do you really expect will happen? Some justice will be unpointed which will undo women's voting rights or equality laws? >In fact, the Supreme Court invalidates your entrie argument, because guess what: I want people I think are “good people” to be in charge of interpreting the constitution. I think everybody can agree with that. Well, I don't agree with that. I would not care less if one of my "constitutional interpreters" drinks, takes cocaine, or has extra marital affairs for example. I only care that the direction they take the law is good. There have been legendary lawmakers and politicians that had all kinds of personal vices. Then again, I'm not American, so I don't have the puritan trait. You guys managed to have a problem with the personal life of MLK too. Nobody in Europe would even think to ask such a BS question: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-honor-Dr-Martin-Luther-King-Jr-in-such-a-glorious-way-when-as-a-married-man-he-had-multiple-extramarital-affairs https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-honor-Dr-Martin-Luther-King-...
    - jakear 8y ago
      Given that’s exactly what has happened, yes I do think that’s what would happen. I’m sure even as a non-American you’re aware of Brett Kavanaugh and his potential effect on abortion law. And I don’t care what they do in their personal life either. I care about how those things will effect they laws the pass: if someone drinks and does cocaine and has extramarital affairs, but doesn’t fuck over women/minorities, I’m all for them. If someone does the opposite, I’m against them.
- 8y ago

blattimwind 8y ago

"It was individual employees who violated the agreement" How do you know this? Facebook invested well over a hundred million dollars into this particular app, I would have to hear some very compelling arguments to see this episode as "misconduct of individual employees". That being said I agree with the stance on thinking before doing, it's just that I don't believe that Facebooks operational conduct is rooted in individual employees, but rather in their company culture, values and leadership.

detaro 8y ago
I don't think that's the parents point, but instead that inside the "blob" Facebook individuals have made the decisions, and bear direct responsibility for what happened. "Company culture" doesn't absolve the individual.
- blattimwind 8y ago
  Absolutely and I wouldn't want to imply so.

save_ferris 8y ago

One wonders what actually would effect change on the part of Facebook. Clearly the market doesn't care about the ethical lapses beyond the major initial headlines. The truth is that Facebook wouldn't be able to get away with a lot this if they didn't have an incredibly talented engineering division. And even though most individuals aren't making these terrible decisions, they definitely support them through their work. If Facebook becomes an unattractive destination due to the social cost of working there, that might bring about change.

deepspace 8y ago

I have been saying for a long time that out industry needs an ethical code of conduct. And employees who willingly work for companies acting unethically should be shunned throughout the industry. Imagine a world where people knew that having Facebook or SCO or Palantir on your resume meant automatic rejection by any company subscribing to the code of conduct. Unethical companies would face huge pressure from their own workforce to clean up their act.