5 ms·

I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be impr

I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better.

shephardjhon 5y ago
"facebook isnt going anywhere". If this was the 90s/early 2000s you would say that about Yahoo. MySpace was a thing for a long time and operated in a way that we were never concerned about it causing the end of democracy or a civil war or helping dictator. I know part of it was technology at the time but also MySpace never used the kind of rage inciting algorithms Facebook does. I only hope PyTorch and Oculus get spun off before facebook gets shut down.
- ramraj07 5y ago
  Yahoo is the absolute opposite of Facebook in every conceivable way. Jerry Yang famously roughly said (someone did) they had no idea how they’re making all the money from banner ads. They’re famously stupid in passing on every major tech company willingly coming to them to be bought out. Facebook famously and studiously (and in hindsight extremely accurately) bought out every conceivable future competitor ensuring they truly don’t have competition in their real market. And their top brass know exactly what company and market they are in contrary to popular belief. barring legislation to split or curtail this org it will continue to metastasize and thrive in the world with reckless abandon.
runarberg 5y ago
I’m not really well versed in the history of consumerism, so I ask: Is there a common pattern to what happens with companies which produce harmful products for their customers? Facebook is by no means the first company to do something like this. E.g. Which cigarette company went furthest in marketing to children, are they still in business? Did any car companies refuse to include seat belts after their safety records were prooven, did they loose good workers as a result of that stubbornness?
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  The porn industry seems to be thriving, so I'd say no.
- shephardjhon 5y ago
  Camel is out of business and they had a cartoon mascot. Also i cant remember the name but one used the Flintstones, they are also out of business.
  - otterley 5y ago
    Camel cigarettes are still sold all over the place. Joe Camel as an advertising mascot is dead, but the cigarettes are still very much alive.
ramraj07 5y ago
You can say that for Fox News, or for some company that makes the predator drones. But many would clearly not want to work for such companies. Yet Facebook, a lot of tech folks decide “meh it’s not exactly a war crime” or are blithely/willfully ignorant of its consequences. After this unrefutable proof now, anyone who joins Facebook better learn to live with their decision, if that’s the kind of dilemma they care about that is.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  > After this unrefutable proof They may just be smart enough to know that it's not irrefutable proof.
iepathos 5y ago
Yeah... I get where you're coming from but imo if you're a storm trooper working on the death star and you keep going into work everyday knowing who and what you serve, then you're not a "good" person anymore. More like "ok" or "meh" at best when it comes to your personal morals/ethics.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  They aren't storm troopers on the death star; that's just silly. IF THEY'RE DEMONS IN HELL THEN THEY WON'T CHANGE SATAN'S MIND! Come on.
tablespoon 5y ago
> I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better. I wish I remember the article that explained this to me, but "participate, but try to change it from the inside" pretty much simplifies into just "participate." So all those good people will end up doing (from the inside) is help Facebook achieve Facebook's existing bad goals. The best thing a "good person" can do to Facebook is leak and hope an external entity takes it down, but most of those good people won't have access to anything that's worth leaking.
michaelmrose 5y ago
Why can't we just fine it 100% of revenue not profit until they can't keep the lights on or pay a lawyer to sue.
- sumedh 5y ago
  After Arthur Andersen was shutdown and ordinary people lost their jobs, the US govt has stopped taking down companies.
robbrown451 5y ago
No, but if fewer people want to work for Facebook that Facebook has to pay them more to get them onboard, Facebook has a financial incentive to do better.
matkoniecz 5y ago
> and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better. I can buy this reasoning for people in leadership positions, but it seems rationalization for peons working on logging systems, performance etc. Note that there is an alternative - making bad things illegal or enforcing existing laws. That is hard to do - but still easier than somehow convincing FB to act against its own interests.

shephardjhon 5y ago

"facebook isnt going anywhere". If this was the 90s/early 2000s you would say that about Yahoo. MySpace was a thing for a long time and operated in a way that we were never concerned about it causing the end of democracy or a civil war or helping dictator. I know part of it was technology at the time but also MySpace never used the kind of rage inciting algorithms Facebook does. I only hope PyTorch and Oculus get spun off before facebook gets shut down.

ramraj07 5y ago
Yahoo is the absolute opposite of Facebook in every conceivable way. Jerry Yang famously roughly said (someone did) they had no idea how they’re making all the money from banner ads. They’re famously stupid in passing on every major tech company willingly coming to them to be bought out. Facebook famously and studiously (and in hindsight extremely accurately) bought out every conceivable future competitor ensuring they truly don’t have competition in their real market. And their top brass know exactly what company and market they are in contrary to popular belief. barring legislation to split or curtail this org it will continue to metastasize and thrive in the world with reckless abandon.

runarberg 5y ago

I’m not really well versed in the history of consumerism, so I ask: Is there a common pattern to what happens with companies which produce harmful products for their customers? Facebook is by no means the first company to do something like this. E.g. Which cigarette company went furthest in marketing to children, are they still in business? Did any car companies refuse to include seat belts after their safety records were prooven, did they loose good workers as a result of that stubbornness?

robertlagrant 5y ago
The porn industry seems to be thriving, so I'd say no.
shephardjhon 5y ago
Camel is out of business and they had a cartoon mascot. Also i cant remember the name but one used the Flintstones, they are also out of business.
- otterley 5y ago
  Camel cigarettes are still sold all over the place. Joe Camel as an advertising mascot is dead, but the cigarettes are still very much alive.

ramraj07 5y ago

You can say that for Fox News, or for some company that makes the predator drones. But many would clearly not want to work for such companies. Yet Facebook, a lot of tech folks decide “meh it’s not exactly a war crime” or are blithely/willfully ignorant of its consequences. After this unrefutable proof now, anyone who joins Facebook better learn to live with their decision, if that’s the kind of dilemma they care about that is.

robertlagrant 5y ago
> After this unrefutable proof They may just be smart enough to know that it's not irrefutable proof.

iepathos 5y ago

Yeah... I get where you're coming from but imo if you're a storm trooper working on the death star and you keep going into work everyday knowing who and what you serve, then you're not a "good" person anymore. More like "ok" or "meh" at best when it comes to your personal morals/ethics.

robertlagrant 5y ago
They aren't storm troopers on the death star; that's just silly. IF THEY'RE DEMONS IN HELL THEN THEY WON'T CHANGE SATAN'S MIND! Come on.

tablespoon 5y ago

> I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better. I wish I remember the article that explained this to me, but "participate, but try to change it from the inside" pretty much simplifies into just "participate." So all those good people will end up doing (from the inside) is help Facebook achieve Facebook's existing bad goals. The best thing a "good person" can do to Facebook is leak and hope an external entity takes it down, but most of those good people won't have access to anything that's worth leaking.

michaelmrose 5y ago

Why can't we just fine it 100% of revenue not profit until they can't keep the lights on or pay a lawyer to sue.

sumedh 5y ago
After Arthur Andersen was shutdown and ordinary people lost their jobs, the US govt has stopped taking down companies.

robbrown451 5y ago

No, but if fewer people want to work for Facebook that Facebook has to pay them more to get them onboard, Facebook has a financial incentive to do better.

matkoniecz 5y ago

> and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better. I can buy this reasoning for people in leadership positions, but it seems rationalization for peons working on logging systems, performance etc. Note that there is an alternative - making bad things illegal or enforcing existing laws. That is hard to do - but still easier than somehow convincing FB to act against its own interests.