4 ms·

I still find Facebook has one of the most toxic cultures of any company out there. All they've ever done during their history is betray user trust, but it's ok

I still find Facebook has one of the most toxic cultures of any company out there. All they've ever done during their history is betray user trust, but it's ok as long as they keep 'apologizing' and then doing nothing to fix it

nappy-doo 7y ago
Did you work there? I worked there for 2 years (it was a mistake), and found that the culture wasn't toxic, just obtuse. They never questioned what they did, or thought about the implications. They focused on "move fast," without really thinking through implications of things.
- ebg13 7y ago
  > the culture wasn't toxic, just obtuse. They never questioned what they did, or thought about the implications I question your distinction. Toxic behavior is largely caused by people not caring about harm caused to others.
- Diederich 7y ago
  If you have a few minutes, I wonder if you can expand on that? Does "it was a mistake" stem primarily from '"move fast," without really thinking through implications'? Thanks!
- rainyMammoth 7y ago
  Working somewhere and seeing a place from the inside has nothing to do with the fact that the company is toxic or not. I think we all agree that Facebook takes really good care of their employees and keep them happy, whatever it takes. That doesn't prevent the company to produce a product that is toxic to humanity. It is of course difficult to see that when you are extremely well paid and your salary depends on you producing that product.
tinus_hn 7y ago
https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/mark-zuckerberg-called-early-facebook-users-dumb-f-s-for-sharing-data-giving-up-privacy-1195396-2018-03-22 https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/mark-zuckerb... Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS [Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one? Zuck: People just submitted it. Zuck: I don't know why. Zuck: They "trust me" Zuck: Dumb f*s.
repolfx 7y ago
That's a huge over-reaction. One reason Facebook came to dominate over older social networks was that they provided much, much better user privacy controls, they were better at keeping fake users off their networks and they kept the site more secure. Before Facebook social networks didn't have APIs and thus didn't have permissions - everything just scraped the (always public) profile pages. Moreover many of the things they're being rapped for here aren't even betraying user trust. I believe the only time they've ever asked for passwords for third party services is to import friend lists. That's a useful and optional feature. If a mail provider doesn't have an OAuth style API, how else is it meant to work? I know everyone has decided it's cool to bash Facebook because they're big and use advertising. But when I look at the actions of the FTC here, I wonder how on earth such trivial things turned into such a huge fine. Advertising doesn't kill anyone, and targeted advertising is much preferable to the noisy punch-the-monkey type of barrel scraping ads the internet used to be filled with. If they use a phone number to better target ads to me (presumably regionally) how is this any different to using my IP address? At worst it means I see more local businesses. Yeah, if they'd had some small print somewhere, a few people would have cared. Most wouldn't and we know this because they use WhatsApp which already gives Facebook your phone number. Big deal? I just can't get worked up about these trivial "evils" that mostly exist for my own convenience, or which are irrelevant given the set of services me and all my friends use i.e. Facebook gets the same data anyway voluntarily. Why am I the only one?
- annadane 7y ago
  They certainly don't provide better privacy controls today, if they ever did. And even that they ever did is unclear. https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-tour-hasnt-fixed-facebook/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-t...
- bryan_w 7y ago
  Oh man, while I agree with you, I don't see your arguments landing well with this crowd

nappy-doo 7y ago

Did you work there? I worked there for 2 years (it was a mistake), and found that the culture wasn't toxic, just obtuse. They never questioned what they did, or thought about the implications. They focused on "move fast," without really thinking through implications of things.

ebg13 7y ago
> the culture wasn't toxic, just obtuse. They never questioned what they did, or thought about the implications I question your distinction. Toxic behavior is largely caused by people not caring about harm caused to others.
Diederich 7y ago
If you have a few minutes, I wonder if you can expand on that? Does "it was a mistake" stem primarily from '"move fast," without really thinking through implications'? Thanks!
rainyMammoth 7y ago
Working somewhere and seeing a place from the inside has nothing to do with the fact that the company is toxic or not. I think we all agree that Facebook takes really good care of their employees and keep them happy, whatever it takes. That doesn't prevent the company to produce a product that is toxic to humanity. It is of course difficult to see that when you are extremely well paid and your salary depends on you producing that product.

tinus_hn 7y ago

https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/mark-zuckerberg-called-early-facebook-users-dumb-f-s-for-sharing-data-giving-up-privacy-1195396-2018-03-22 https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/mark-zuckerb... Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS [Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one? Zuck: People just submitted it. Zuck: I don't know why. Zuck: They "trust me" Zuck: Dumb f*s.

repolfx 7y ago

That's a huge over-reaction. One reason Facebook came to dominate over older social networks was that they provided much, much better user privacy controls, they were better at keeping fake users off their networks and they kept the site more secure. Before Facebook social networks didn't have APIs and thus didn't have permissions - everything just scraped the (always public) profile pages. Moreover many of the things they're being rapped for here aren't even betraying user trust. I believe the only time they've ever asked for passwords for third party services is to import friend lists. That's a useful and optional feature. If a mail provider doesn't have an OAuth style API, how else is it meant to work? I know everyone has decided it's cool to bash Facebook because they're big and use advertising. But when I look at the actions of the FTC here, I wonder how on earth such trivial things turned into such a huge fine. Advertising doesn't kill anyone, and targeted advertising is much preferable to the noisy punch-the-monkey type of barrel scraping ads the internet used to be filled with. If they use a phone number to better target ads to me (presumably regionally) how is this any different to using my IP address? At worst it means I see more local businesses. Yeah, if they'd had some small print somewhere, a few people would have cared. Most wouldn't and we know this because they use WhatsApp which already gives Facebook your phone number. Big deal? I just can't get worked up about these trivial "evils" that mostly exist for my own convenience, or which are irrelevant given the set of services me and all my friends use i.e. Facebook gets the same data anyway voluntarily. Why am I the only one?

annadane 7y ago
They certainly don't provide better privacy controls today, if they ever did. And even that they ever did is unclear. https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-tour-hasnt-fixed-facebook/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-t...
bryan_w 7y ago
Oh man, while I agree with you, I don't see your arguments landing well with this crowd