4 ms·

> "Maybe we were just a bit naive," Cornet said. They likely were, and think of me what you like but I've noticed the same with most Americans I've known. Not

> "Maybe we were just a bit naive," Cornet said. They likely were, and think of me what you like but I've noticed the same with most Americans I've known. Not sure why that is but apparently there's some good amount of propaganda going on in the USA and people apparently believe it. Meanwhile people have to pay $5000 after an ambulance picks them up. Or $90000 for semi-trivial medical procedures. I believe asking yourself "is my country really like I believe it is?" is a good food for thought even it's a bit sideways to this here topic at hand. -- On topic: I can sympathize with the author. I know what it is to have been a long time in a company; it becomes much more than a workplace. You have friends, you even have people you invite to your Sunday barbecues. It's also very likely that a number of internal processes are going smoother for you because you know whom to ping and what exactly to write in a form so your stuff gets done quicker. You have job stability and unless you are rocking the boat too much your seat is likely 99% safe. All of those become true stoppers when you start pondering leaving. They pull you back and make you doubt yourself and your idea of switching company. But unlike a number of commenters here I find nothing hypocritical about the decision to go to Twitter. We don't know how Twitter operates internally; maybe it's still better than Google. Or maybe they are still after FAANG level of wages so are ready to make some ethical compromises for them? In any case, immediately discounting somebody's opinion on a corporation because they joined another corporation misses a lot of context, is flamey and non-constructive and almost smells like a paid troll, and is something I don't expect HN to condone. But sadly, here we go, it's the top comment here.

prions 5y ago
You are not immune to propaganda
- pdimitar 5y ago
  Of course I'm not. I realized this some years ago and started actively trying to prevent it. But I'm sure I'm buying a propaganda that I shouldn't, even today.
fffffssssss 5y ago
>apparently there's some good amount of propaganda going on in the USA and people apparently believe it. >Meanwhile people have to pay $5000 after an ambulance picks them up. Or $90000 for semi-trivial medical procedures. Ironic
ckarmann 5y ago
> They likely were, and think of me what you like but I've noticed the same with most Americans I've known. I am probably misunderstanding what you say, but Cornet has grown up in France, and is probably very aware that health care cost in the US is not a normal thing since he comes from a country where it is considerably cheaper if not free. His naiveté was about the nature of Google and how he thought a giant corporation basing their revenue on ads and collecting information could be a positive force in the world and not abuse its power. It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy, which in a sense make it even harder to fix the company: if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better. Twitter in that sense has never promised to not be evil. You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it.
- pdimitar 5y ago
  > His naiveté was about the nature of Google and how he thought a giant corporation basing their revenue on ads and collecting information could be a positive force in the world and not abuse its power. I agree with your refinement. Admittedly the first part of my comment was a rant on a bigger topic that rubs me the wrong way every now and then -- with the slight clarification that to me "an American" isn't "USA-born", it's more like "has lived in USA for a long time". > It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy I think so too but then again, a big company changing ethics is also smart enough to know they have to peddle certain propaganda at their more naive hard workers. Sadly it has been the case ever since written history and it seems to be a general weakness of the human brain: we can trade things in our lives (physical and mental health, personal happiness, alone time, leisure time etc.) for some "bigger cause". People are especially vulnerable to these "bigger causes require sacrifices" propaganda when they are young. And such huge companies are run by excellent psychologists (I mean that higher management / politicians naturally are such) and they know how to manipulate those younger people. > if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better. Herein lies the conundrum, you are correct. And I'd point out that maybe you here are projecting some naivete: we are not ants, dude, and we don't possess collective hive-mind consciousness so we cannot ever all work together towards a common cause. For every single programmer refusing to work due to warped company ethics there are 1000 more waiting in Africa / India / Eastern Europe / Brazil / etc. These companies' awful ethics will never disappear because the world is too big and there is always somebody who will pick up the job. The only way out is this: that the jobs require so much expertise, experience and a surgical touch that a random hungry team from India cannot ever hope to do the job properly. And for a number of positions inside big companies this is already the case. However the temptation to hire cheaper devs is too great and the companies usually sink a lot of money in those "cheaper" devs until they realize they aren't saving any money due to reduced quality of work, huge communication overhead, general chaos and no planning, and several other such nasty problems that the cheaper dev teams always seem to carry with them. > You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it. I am completely with you here. The thing is though, what we find bad/evil about Twitter's model is what other people absolutely LOVE about it. What can you do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
blueboo 5y ago
> But unlike a number of commenters here I find nothing hypocritical about the decision to go to Twitter… It’s not just about which is less ethical or hypocritical. These are imperfect organisations filled with people who want to have a positive impact, and this person may reasonably believe that a fresh start or a particular role positions them better to make the impact they want to have.
- pdimitar 5y ago
  Agreed. I've been that person as well, trying to enact positive change from the inside.

prions 5y ago

You are not immune to propaganda

pdimitar 5y ago
Of course I'm not. I realized this some years ago and started actively trying to prevent it. But I'm sure I'm buying a propaganda that I shouldn't, even today.

fffffssssss 5y ago

>apparently there's some good amount of propaganda going on in the USA and people apparently believe it. >Meanwhile people have to pay $5000 after an ambulance picks them up. Or $90000 for semi-trivial medical procedures. Ironic

ckarmann 5y ago

> They likely were, and think of me what you like but I've noticed the same with most Americans I've known. I am probably misunderstanding what you say, but Cornet has grown up in France, and is probably very aware that health care cost in the US is not a normal thing since he comes from a country where it is considerably cheaper if not free. His naiveté was about the nature of Google and how he thought a giant corporation basing their revenue on ads and collecting information could be a positive force in the world and not abuse its power. It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy, which in a sense make it even harder to fix the company: if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better. Twitter in that sense has never promised to not be evil. You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it.

pdimitar 5y ago
> His naiveté was about the nature of Google and how he thought a giant corporation basing their revenue on ads and collecting information could be a positive force in the world and not abuse its power. I agree with your refinement. Admittedly the first part of my comment was a rant on a bigger topic that rubs me the wrong way every now and then -- with the slight clarification that to me "an American" isn't "USA-born", it's more like "has lived in USA for a long time". > It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy I think so too but then again, a big company changing ethics is also smart enough to know they have to peddle certain propaganda at their more naive hard workers. Sadly it has been the case ever since written history and it seems to be a general weakness of the human brain: we can trade things in our lives (physical and mental health, personal happiness, alone time, leisure time etc.) for some "bigger cause". People are especially vulnerable to these "bigger causes require sacrifices" propaganda when they are young. And such huge companies are run by excellent psychologists (I mean that higher management / politicians naturally are such) and they know how to manipulate those younger people. > if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better. Herein lies the conundrum, you are correct. And I'd point out that maybe you here are projecting some naivete: we are not ants, dude, and we don't possess collective hive-mind consciousness so we cannot ever all work together towards a common cause. For every single programmer refusing to work due to warped company ethics there are 1000 more waiting in Africa / India / Eastern Europe / Brazil / etc. These companies' awful ethics will never disappear because the world is too big and there is always somebody who will pick up the job. The only way out is this: that the jobs require so much expertise, experience and a surgical touch that a random hungry team from India cannot ever hope to do the job properly. And for a number of positions inside big companies this is already the case. However the temptation to hire cheaper devs is too great and the companies usually sink a lot of money in those "cheaper" devs until they realize they aren't saving any money due to reduced quality of work, huge communication overhead, general chaos and no planning, and several other such nasty problems that the cheaper dev teams always seem to carry with them. > You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it. I am completely with you here. The thing is though, what we find bad/evil about Twitter's model is what other people absolutely LOVE about it. What can you do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

blueboo 5y ago

> But unlike a number of commenters here I find nothing hypocritical about the decision to go to Twitter… It’s not just about which is less ethical or hypocritical. These are imperfect organisations filled with people who want to have a positive impact, and this person may reasonably believe that a fresh start or a particular role positions them better to make the impact they want to have.

pdimitar 5y ago
Agreed. I've been that person as well, trying to enact positive change from the inside.