4 ms·

I work as a database engineer at FB. Do I contribute to the issues FB causes? not really. I work as an accountant at FB. Do I contribute to the issues FB cause

I work as a database engineer at FB. Do I contribute to the issues FB causes? not really. I work as an accountant at FB. Do I contribute to the issues FB causes? Not really. I work as a product manager at FB that isn't a "problematic" project. Do I contribute to the issues FB causes? Not really. Your mental gymnastics are on par for a McKinsey type consultant.

spywaregorilla 5y ago
I don't agree though. That's my point. A database engineer, accountant, and PM all enable the product they support. That is the ultimate goal of the work. If I work on a project to help a pharma company set up its supply chain to produce rare disease treatments, does that enable some guy in Asia to work on oil projects? Vaguely, yes in the sense that there is more money in the system. But not much, and certainly far less than it does on building the local capability to support other pharma companies on similar supply chain problems. Personally I feel the direct impact of my work is positive, and likely orders of magnitude more positive than I would see working in tech for "engagement" or spyware or whatever. If I decide to leave, I'll go to one of the companies working on these same sets of problems. And on a wider spectrum, no I don't believe the firm is bad on a whole. I think it nets good, trending towards banal average. edit: putting it another way Facebook could not run (or would run less effectively) if it had 0 database engineers or PMs. McKinsey's oil division could work just fine if it had 0 pharma consultants. And its not that much of an anathema for some people to work on oil clients.
- ativzzz 5y ago
  > McKinsey's oil division could work just fine if it had 0 pharma consultants Their oil division would be much smaller, or possibly insignificant without the other divisions because the of the total "power" the company has by having its tendrils in every industry and government all over the world. If the COO of Ghana Oil needs a consultant, he will ask his friend the COO of Ghana Pharma, who is using McKinsey, and will get that recommendation. McKinsey is the whole sum of its parts. If some parts didn't exist, the whole would be much less effective, just like engineers and product managers at FB who don't directly work on the "problematic" parts make the whole more effective. Also, I was being sarcrastic to compare your statement about working at McKinsey to FB employees
RhysU 5y ago
In all cases, yes, the hypothetical employee contributes to FB-spread societal damage. For example, if I design a boring mechanical part for a bomb my labor is integral to when that bomb kills civilians. So, if you are in the defense industry, believe in the net benefits of the missions that you support. And likewise for FB. Claiming one is a meaningless cog in a machine, FB or otherwise, and one is therefore absolved of the responsibility of one's downstream impact is disgusting cowardice.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  Component design sounds like a critical part. I find that take uninteresting and obvious. What if you design t shirts for a fashion company that shares a parent with the the bomb company. You're not even in the defense industry. You might be able to argue that your t shirts generate revenue which may translate into capital that the parent company reallocates into the bomb company. What if you're a voter who's elected representative, among a handful of liberal, pro-humanity policies, also supports bombing people in the middle east to support the defense industry? When does it stop being disgusting cowardice and instead pragmatism to acknowledge systems are interlinked and complicated and you may be better focused on the local direct sphere of influence your choices make as the primary driver of your decisions?
  - RhysU 5y ago
    The GP asked if Facebook database, accounting, etc are complicit. Yes. You're asking if capital flows between 2 unrelated entities sharing ownership matter? No. You're asking if diffuse responsibility via elected representation matters? Yes, even if you didn't vote for the representative, it does because they act on your behalf. Obviously, one should focus on what one can change directly where possible. There's no dichotomy--disgusting cowardice can be pragmatic. After all, FB has to pay someone to run its databases and to close its books and therefore someone is going to get paid. But it doesn't have to be you. You have a choice. An increasingly interlinked system makes one increasingly responsible, not less. Unless you want to throw up your hands and to declare utter powerlessness. I can't live that way.
nautilius 5y ago
You may find this current trial in Germany interesting: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/30/1041821397/nazi-concentration-camp-secretary-flees-trial-irmgard-furchner https://www.npr.org/2021/09/30/1041821397/nazi-concentration...

spywaregorilla 5y ago

I don't agree though. That's my point. A database engineer, accountant, and PM all enable the product they support. That is the ultimate goal of the work. If I work on a project to help a pharma company set up its supply chain to produce rare disease treatments, does that enable some guy in Asia to work on oil projects? Vaguely, yes in the sense that there is more money in the system. But not much, and certainly far less than it does on building the local capability to support other pharma companies on similar supply chain problems. Personally I feel the direct impact of my work is positive, and likely orders of magnitude more positive than I would see working in tech for "engagement" or spyware or whatever. If I decide to leave, I'll go to one of the companies working on these same sets of problems. And on a wider spectrum, no I don't believe the firm is bad on a whole. I think it nets good, trending towards banal average. edit: putting it another way Facebook could not run (or would run less effectively) if it had 0 database engineers or PMs. McKinsey's oil division could work just fine if it had 0 pharma consultants. And its not that much of an anathema for some people to work on oil clients.

ativzzz 5y ago
> McKinsey's oil division could work just fine if it had 0 pharma consultants Their oil division would be much smaller, or possibly insignificant without the other divisions because the of the total "power" the company has by having its tendrils in every industry and government all over the world. If the COO of Ghana Oil needs a consultant, he will ask his friend the COO of Ghana Pharma, who is using McKinsey, and will get that recommendation. McKinsey is the whole sum of its parts. If some parts didn't exist, the whole would be much less effective, just like engineers and product managers at FB who don't directly work on the "problematic" parts make the whole more effective. Also, I was being sarcrastic to compare your statement about working at McKinsey to FB employees

RhysU 5y ago

In all cases, yes, the hypothetical employee contributes to FB-spread societal damage. For example, if I design a boring mechanical part for a bomb my labor is integral to when that bomb kills civilians. So, if you are in the defense industry, believe in the net benefits of the missions that you support. And likewise for FB. Claiming one is a meaningless cog in a machine, FB or otherwise, and one is therefore absolved of the responsibility of one's downstream impact is disgusting cowardice.

spywaregorilla 5y ago
Component design sounds like a critical part. I find that take uninteresting and obvious. What if you design t shirts for a fashion company that shares a parent with the the bomb company. You're not even in the defense industry. You might be able to argue that your t shirts generate revenue which may translate into capital that the parent company reallocates into the bomb company. What if you're a voter who's elected representative, among a handful of liberal, pro-humanity policies, also supports bombing people in the middle east to support the defense industry? When does it stop being disgusting cowardice and instead pragmatism to acknowledge systems are interlinked and complicated and you may be better focused on the local direct sphere of influence your choices make as the primary driver of your decisions?
- RhysU 5y ago
  The GP asked if Facebook database, accounting, etc are complicit. Yes. You're asking if capital flows between 2 unrelated entities sharing ownership matter? No. You're asking if diffuse responsibility via elected representation matters? Yes, even if you didn't vote for the representative, it does because they act on your behalf. Obviously, one should focus on what one can change directly where possible. There's no dichotomy--disgusting cowardice can be pragmatic. After all, FB has to pay someone to run its databases and to close its books and therefore someone is going to get paid. But it doesn't have to be you. You have a choice. An increasingly interlinked system makes one increasingly responsible, not less. Unless you want to throw up your hands and to declare utter powerlessness. I can't live that way.

nautilius 5y ago

You may find this current trial in Germany interesting: https://www.npr.org/2021/09/30/1041821397/nazi-concentration-camp-secretary-flees-trial-irmgard-furchner https://www.npr.org/2021/09/30/1041821397/nazi-concentration...