18 ms·

The scariest thing isn't that Amazon is a company worth nearly trillions and using that money to oppress workers to maintain their lead. It's that tech workers

The scariest thing isn't that Amazon is a company worth nearly trillions and using that money to oppress workers to maintain their lead. It's that tech workers are happily applying to get a decent paycheck and crushing people under them, just to protect the company's billions. Then they'll post online about how happy they are to have been smart enough to save up to buy a lakefront home and retire at 45, and say people should follow their path in tech if they're looking for a step up (after destroying the road behind them and making it easier to oppress workers), or worse, pretend to lament how hard it is for other people to follow their footsteps and how something needs to be done. FAANG workers are really entering and sometimes fully into "just following orders" territory. The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them.

someelephant 5y ago
Seems odd to blame other workers here even if they do make a lot of money. The only way workers will be helped is other jobs provide better value to the worker or companies are regulated to provide better conditions. Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests.
- randmeerkat 5y ago
  > Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests. People _are_ responsible for the choices they make _and_ the entities they choose to empower… Anyhow… I’ve known engineers that have chosen community over themselves… Regardless, you’re on HN, fortunately you don’t have to make that choice. Instead you can skip FAANG toxicity and join a startup “community” that aligns with your values. Even better you can start your own startup. The payout is also potentially far better than grinding at a soul sucking FAANG position for years.
  - chii 5y ago
    > The payout is also potentially far better than grinding at a soul sucking FAANG position for years. if you consider financial pay out, i really can't agree that it's a better payout for the risk you're taking. A startup can be a lottery, and "winning" can be difficult and has a chance element. On average, i think the payout is lower than employment at the FAANGs, esp. if you do good salary negotiation and move often to ensure you're not missing out any uptick in the market rate. Of course, a startup, like winning the lottery, pays out a lot more when successful, and some people prefer the high risk high reward - it's not a wrong choice. But that should be understood first.
  - random314 5y ago
    This is another transfer of responsibility from the government to the citizen. Same as carbon footprint being used to guilt trip the individual who cannot stop global warming. No matter how many engineers quit or refuse to apply to Amazon they will always have a replacement. The solution for both climate change and Amazon is government intervention. Be it subsidies for Solar or regulatory fines for Amazon.
    - robertlagrant 5y ago
      Phrasing this as a "transfer" is begging the question; it can't be a transfer if the responsibility is not decided. The word "responsibility" is also a moral conundrum, not an objective one, which gums up the works in terms of finding a good solution. People can bikeshed morals all day. A clearer way to think of it is in terms of people who have the power to change the situation: - Governments can issue fines, but this is unlikely to harm the corporate enough to make it change. It can win votes though, so it does happen. - Governments can write regulations, but this is done sparingly because of all the unintended consequences of adding any regulations to any industry. Also, a common (intended, by the incumbents) consequence of regulations is adding ones that disadvantage new participants in a market. - People can choose to change the company from the inside, or not work for the company. This can work quite well if changes are encouraged from various levels, but that's not common. - People can choose to not use the company (e.g. not to shop at Amazon). The second and fourth are the most powerful options, with the fourth being the very most powerful.
- notreallyserio 5y ago
  > Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests. There are plenty of folks that won't put personal enrichment above abhorrent labor practices.
- grapeskin 5y ago
  Tech workers can skip FAANG’s 300k salaries and still do fine with 180k at a more ethical company. Those people are responsible. The people slaving for 50 cents over minimum wage and still being unable to pay rent don’t have much of a choice.
  - chii 5y ago
    > skip FAANG’s 300k salaries and still do fine with 180k at a more ethical company. Those people are responsible. they are ethical, or altruistic, but certainly can't claim they are financially responsible. If they don't have dependents (now or in the future), then they can remain financially irresponsible, because it will have little effect. But if they plan on having dependents such as children, they will need the funds to compete for scarce resources such as housing and school etc. They will also need to provide for their own retirement. If they choose to take a lower paying job (when a higher paying one is definitely available), they are making a sacrifice on behalf of their dependents, who may or may not appreciate this choice being made for them.
    - knowledge-clay 5y ago
      > they are ethical, or altruistic, but certainly can't claim they are financially responsible. I would hardly describe taking a salary that puts you in the top 5% of earners instead of the top 2% to be financially irresponsible.
      - rsanek 5y ago
        That percentile can vary pretty significantly based on where you live.
    - grapeskin 5y ago
      Taking a job that screws over workers below you is really just sticking a middle finger up to the world around you. A typical programming job is more than enough to provide for a family, a home, and early retirement. Burning down the next generation by empowering mega corporations just "for your kids" is the definition of selfish. Boomers did selfish things "for their kids" and now their kids are absolutely screwed with climate change and a worse off economic system. But yes, they did certainly provide for their own retirement--at the cost of the whole world. FAANG developers are the same. Amazon and Apple can pay fat checks to their tech workers because they cut costs and shamelessly exploit everyone working in their lower level positions. Eventually they'll push everyone down to lower levels and have the technology to enforce it without human interference. But hey, someone bought their kid a nice car and they retired to the Bahamas and got a few maids with that huge developer check. Got to look at the bright side.
- bamboozled 5y ago
  I've turned down a bunch of jobs on moral grounds. I work for a charity organization now. I make less money but I'm much happier then I have been working in jobs with different / more shady objectives.
  - someelephant 5y ago
    If we could convert the value you get from charity work in to dollars, you would be making more than people working for big corp. Your values are atypical, and I'm glad you are able to do the work that provides you with the most benefit.
sershe 5y ago
As a tech worker who grew up in an ex-communist, then essentially 3rd world, country, I find calling $15/hour, 0-skill-required warehouse jobs "oppression" really laughable. American poor are quite a spoiled and entitled bunch. I don't work for Amazon but I would be quite consciously proud to. Upsetting the kind of people who use "oppress" non-ironically in a similar context is just an additional small perk :P
Firmwarrior 5y ago
I wouldn't say that coders as an industry are destroying the road behind us, since there isn't really a road between "warehouse worker" and "software engineer", unless someone has the knack for coding (in which case there's a very clear and well-paved road within the company between those roles) I think the best solution is to empower workers via unions or whatever else. It should be impossible for workers to get ground into dust by companies the way they do now.
- grapeskin 5y ago
  Massive salaries for programmers won’t last forever. Most people here on HN are self-taught; it’s a skill a large number of motivated people can pick up. Eventually, large corporations will feel comfortable lowering wages once they have a secure grip on the market, and the tools programmers today made will be used against the next generation. It’s no different from millennials resenting boomers for burning economic bridges behind them with outsourcing and so on just to save a few dollars on costs and pull in higher wages for themselves.
  - WYepQ4dNnG 5y ago
    and that's why smart sw eng should start transitioning into management...
    - LoveGracePeace 5y ago
      Forget that, approaching 60, still code every day. Management is for those who have management skills and want to do it. Coding is for the rest of us who want it. Saw how strong software would be as a kid in the 1970's and realized it was an industry whose dynamics were unlike any other industry, ever.
      - robertlagrant 5y ago
        I think it's one of the first industries, if not the first, that has the perfect combination of scalable output from workers, workers being potentially smarter than their bosses, and success being much less about relationships than skills, compared to many other industries.
chottocharaii 5y ago
The calls for regulation recognise that these problems won't be solved by individual actions by employees. Only collective action, or political action will solve this. Given that unions among tech workers are a non-factor; that leaves political action as the only thing left to call for.
- daniel-grigg 5y ago
  Change starts with the individual. Inspire others with your actions. For example I may lack the sway to affect political action on climate change but I can still change the way I live - solar power, consume less meat, etc.
coding123 5y ago
It's all downhill if you keep going up. It's supposed to be a system where you enrich your country that you live. So you see less homeless people. But, Walmart and Amazon executives have focused on selling you things made in other countries. China, mostly. It has just taken a long time to catch up but the system has nearly perfected moving money up and out.
GoodJokes 5y ago
sneak 5y ago
> FAANG workers are really entering and sometimes fully into "just following orders" territory. Not entering; we are there. Microsoft/GitHub has among its clients in the USA an organization that runs literal concentration camps down in Texas. Amazon built a custom airgapped datacenter at Langley for the CIA, who has been known to assassinate US citizens without trial.
5350-uiop-1130 5y ago
"How we live is so different from how we ought to live that he who studies what ought to be done rather than what is done will learn the way to his downfall rather than to his preservation." Machievelli Most people are selfish and act in their own self interest despite what virtue signaling on social media they may do. You really think people are willing to risk their 6 figure salaries for some anonymous warehouse workers...
- krageon 5y ago
  Your argument is that people are not lazy or ethically incompetent, but rather just straight up evil. Is that a fair characterisation? If so, I don't find it compelling.
  - 0des 5y ago
    Are you addressing this part of their comment or the previous piece? > You really think people are willing to risk their 6 figure salaries for some anonymous warehouse workers...
  - 5350-uiop-1130 5y ago
    No not evil. My observation is that people are pragmatic (hence, machiavelli and the arguments of moral ethics). My observation is that why should we expect highly paid tech workers to conform to some higher ideal. They have more to lose.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      I have to disagree that ehite collar folks at FAANG have more to loose. Blue Collar flks are employed at low salaries in economically weak regions, they loosr their job they risk loosing everything. Especially in the US with a non-existant social safety net. White Collar, especially tech employees, have the option to work for similar salaries somewhere else rather easily. Other than that, full agreement.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    This is Hannah Arendt's thesis behind "the banality of evil"[1]: > Arendt found Eichmann an ordinary, rather bland, bureaucrat, who in her words, was ‘neither perverted nor sadistic’, but ‘terrifyingly normal’. He acted without any motive other than to diligently advance his career. Eichmann was not an amoral monster, she concluded in her study of the case. Instead, he performed evil deeds without evil intentions, a fact connected to his ‘thoughtlessness’, a disengagement from the reality of his evil acts. Eichmann ‘never realised what he was doing’ due to an ‘inability… to think from the standpoint of somebody else’. Lacking this particular cognitive ability, he ‘commit[ted] crimes under circumstances that made it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he [was] doing wrong’. > Arendt dubbed these collective characteristics of Eichmann ‘the banality of evil’: he was not inherently evil, but merely shallow and clueless, a ‘joiner’, in the words of one contemporary interpreter of Arendt’s thesis: he was a man who drifted, in search of purpose and direction, not out of deep ideological belief. [1] https://www.britannica.com/story/what-did-hannah-arendt-really-mean-by-the-banality-of-evil https://www.britannica.com/story/what-did-hannah-arendt-real...
throw93232 5y ago
That is really dystopian stuff. Instead of electing goverment that would split monopoly, we will blame low level employees for not "resisting". Be quiet and toe the party line!!
- grapeskin 5y ago
  In a government elected by the people, the people can't absolve themselves of guilt when they're willingly voting for corrupt officials. In governments without elected representatives, the responsibility lies entirely with the people enforcing the oppression against those weaker than them and protecting those above. So yeah. People happily enforcing a massive wealth divide are responsible. They just don't want to accept personal responsibility because their pockets are fat. And I highly doubt they're out on the streets demanding reform to close the wealth gap and risk bringing their pay down so that those warehouse workers can live better.
  - andrekandre 5y ago
    > In a government elected by the people, the people can't absolve themselves of guilt when they're willingly voting for corrupt officials. it can be said, that increasingly its representatives that are choosing (gerrymandering) thier constituents instead of the other way around, and many districts are not competitive at all (e.g no alternative candidates)
mschuster91 5y ago
> FAANG workers are really entering and sometimes fully into "just following orders" territory. The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. The thing is, Amazon, Walmart and fellow profiteers set up shop precisely where people have not much other choice than to work for them - in short, they set up shop in areas with somewhat decent traffic infrastructure, cheap real estate and lots of unemployment (and the latter two often come together). So yes, the answer to the problem that is exploitative labor practices is government regulation, as it has been for the last two centuries.
r_singh 5y ago
> ….real solution is to simply not work for them And as hard as it may be, choose to buy from them
weq 5y ago
FAANG workers are SHEEP. I live on a lakefront at 35, havnt gone into an office in 5years, had FAANG recruiters at my door since i was 21 . They like to get you young because they can then set your expectations of what work culture is. And while i am at it, LOL to the conferance culture, talk about collecting stars. Every framework needs a speaking circut so you can somehow bring the familiarty of university into your working life because you have never known anything more then this. Swallowed by the system, addicted to consuming, pushed forward by the prospect of making an impact, used and abused by capitalistic entity that courted you, young, impressionable, starry eyed.
homo_ergaster 5y ago
> The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. If you’re calling something a “real solution” it should have at least some chance of actually happening and solving the problem. Strong regulation from the government against union busting is both possible and effective (look at what FDR did if you want an example). Wishing individuals would live up to your standards of ethical behavior when they have no reason to (and may have personal/family reasons that make them feel they need the paycheck) will not ever change anything.
portpecos 5y ago
> The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. Just like Twitter can ban Donald Trump for using certain phrases (Steal, Election), so can Amazon ban certain words. They’re both private corporate entities. Exactly as you said, if you don’t like it, move elsewhere.

someelephant 5y ago

Seems odd to blame other workers here even if they do make a lot of money. The only way workers will be helped is other jobs provide better value to the worker or companies are regulated to provide better conditions. Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests.

randmeerkat 5y ago
> Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests. People _are_ responsible for the choices they make _and_ the entities they choose to empower… Anyhow… I’ve known engineers that have chosen community over themselves… Regardless, you’re on HN, fortunately you don’t have to make that choice. Instead you can skip FAANG toxicity and join a startup “community” that aligns with your values. Even better you can start your own startup. The payout is also potentially far better than grinding at a soul sucking FAANG position for years.
- chii 5y ago
  > The payout is also potentially far better than grinding at a soul sucking FAANG position for years. if you consider financial pay out, i really can't agree that it's a better payout for the risk you're taking. A startup can be a lottery, and "winning" can be difficult and has a chance element. On average, i think the payout is lower than employment at the FAANGs, esp. if you do good salary negotiation and move often to ensure you're not missing out any uptick in the market rate. Of course, a startup, like winning the lottery, pays out a lot more when successful, and some people prefer the high risk high reward - it's not a wrong choice. But that should be understood first.
- random314 5y ago
  This is another transfer of responsibility from the government to the citizen. Same as carbon footprint being used to guilt trip the individual who cannot stop global warming. No matter how many engineers quit or refuse to apply to Amazon they will always have a replacement. The solution for both climate change and Amazon is government intervention. Be it subsidies for Solar or regulatory fines for Amazon.
  - robertlagrant 5y ago
    Phrasing this as a "transfer" is begging the question; it can't be a transfer if the responsibility is not decided. The word "responsibility" is also a moral conundrum, not an objective one, which gums up the works in terms of finding a good solution. People can bikeshed morals all day. A clearer way to think of it is in terms of people who have the power to change the situation: - Governments can issue fines, but this is unlikely to harm the corporate enough to make it change. It can win votes though, so it does happen. - Governments can write regulations, but this is done sparingly because of all the unintended consequences of adding any regulations to any industry. Also, a common (intended, by the incumbents) consequence of regulations is adding ones that disadvantage new participants in a market. - People can choose to change the company from the inside, or not work for the company. This can work quite well if changes are encouraged from various levels, but that's not common. - People can choose to not use the company (e.g. not to shop at Amazon). The second and fourth are the most powerful options, with the fourth being the very most powerful.
notreallyserio 5y ago
> Personal and corporate interests will always trump community interests. There are plenty of folks that won't put personal enrichment above abhorrent labor practices.
grapeskin 5y ago
Tech workers can skip FAANG’s 300k salaries and still do fine with 180k at a more ethical company. Those people are responsible. The people slaving for 50 cents over minimum wage and still being unable to pay rent don’t have much of a choice.
- chii 5y ago
  > skip FAANG’s 300k salaries and still do fine with 180k at a more ethical company. Those people are responsible. they are ethical, or altruistic, but certainly can't claim they are financially responsible. If they don't have dependents (now or in the future), then they can remain financially irresponsible, because it will have little effect. But if they plan on having dependents such as children, they will need the funds to compete for scarce resources such as housing and school etc. They will also need to provide for their own retirement. If they choose to take a lower paying job (when a higher paying one is definitely available), they are making a sacrifice on behalf of their dependents, who may or may not appreciate this choice being made for them.
  - knowledge-clay 5y ago
    > they are ethical, or altruistic, but certainly can't claim they are financially responsible. I would hardly describe taking a salary that puts you in the top 5% of earners instead of the top 2% to be financially irresponsible.
    - rsanek 5y ago
      That percentile can vary pretty significantly based on where you live.
  - grapeskin 5y ago
    Taking a job that screws over workers below you is really just sticking a middle finger up to the world around you. A typical programming job is more than enough to provide for a family, a home, and early retirement. Burning down the next generation by empowering mega corporations just "for your kids" is the definition of selfish. Boomers did selfish things "for their kids" and now their kids are absolutely screwed with climate change and a worse off economic system. But yes, they did certainly provide for their own retirement--at the cost of the whole world. FAANG developers are the same. Amazon and Apple can pay fat checks to their tech workers because they cut costs and shamelessly exploit everyone working in their lower level positions. Eventually they'll push everyone down to lower levels and have the technology to enforce it without human interference. But hey, someone bought their kid a nice car and they retired to the Bahamas and got a few maids with that huge developer check. Got to look at the bright side.
bamboozled 5y ago
I've turned down a bunch of jobs on moral grounds. I work for a charity organization now. I make less money but I'm much happier then I have been working in jobs with different / more shady objectives.
- someelephant 5y ago
  If we could convert the value you get from charity work in to dollars, you would be making more than people working for big corp. Your values are atypical, and I'm glad you are able to do the work that provides you with the most benefit.

sershe 5y ago

As a tech worker who grew up in an ex-communist, then essentially 3rd world, country, I find calling $15/hour, 0-skill-required warehouse jobs "oppression" really laughable. American poor are quite a spoiled and entitled bunch. I don't work for Amazon but I would be quite consciously proud to. Upsetting the kind of people who use "oppress" non-ironically in a similar context is just an additional small perk :P

Firmwarrior 5y ago

I wouldn't say that coders as an industry are destroying the road behind us, since there isn't really a road between "warehouse worker" and "software engineer", unless someone has the knack for coding (in which case there's a very clear and well-paved road within the company between those roles) I think the best solution is to empower workers via unions or whatever else. It should be impossible for workers to get ground into dust by companies the way they do now.

grapeskin 5y ago
Massive salaries for programmers won’t last forever. Most people here on HN are self-taught; it’s a skill a large number of motivated people can pick up. Eventually, large corporations will feel comfortable lowering wages once they have a secure grip on the market, and the tools programmers today made will be used against the next generation. It’s no different from millennials resenting boomers for burning economic bridges behind them with outsourcing and so on just to save a few dollars on costs and pull in higher wages for themselves.
- WYepQ4dNnG 5y ago
  and that's why smart sw eng should start transitioning into management...
  - LoveGracePeace 5y ago
    Forget that, approaching 60, still code every day. Management is for those who have management skills and want to do it. Coding is for the rest of us who want it. Saw how strong software would be as a kid in the 1970's and realized it was an industry whose dynamics were unlike any other industry, ever.
    - robertlagrant 5y ago
      I think it's one of the first industries, if not the first, that has the perfect combination of scalable output from workers, workers being potentially smarter than their bosses, and success being much less about relationships than skills, compared to many other industries.

chottocharaii 5y ago

The calls for regulation recognise that these problems won't be solved by individual actions by employees. Only collective action, or political action will solve this. Given that unions among tech workers are a non-factor; that leaves political action as the only thing left to call for.

daniel-grigg 5y ago
Change starts with the individual. Inspire others with your actions. For example I may lack the sway to affect political action on climate change but I can still change the way I live - solar power, consume less meat, etc.

coding123 5y ago

It's all downhill if you keep going up. It's supposed to be a system where you enrich your country that you live. So you see less homeless people. But, Walmart and Amazon executives have focused on selling you things made in other countries. China, mostly. It has just taken a long time to catch up but the system has nearly perfected moving money up and out.

GoodJokes 5y ago

sneak 5y ago

> FAANG workers are really entering and sometimes fully into "just following orders" territory. Not entering; we are there. Microsoft/GitHub has among its clients in the USA an organization that runs literal concentration camps down in Texas. Amazon built a custom airgapped datacenter at Langley for the CIA, who has been known to assassinate US citizens without trial.

5350-uiop-1130 5y ago

"How we live is so different from how we ought to live that he who studies what ought to be done rather than what is done will learn the way to his downfall rather than to his preservation." Machievelli Most people are selfish and act in their own self interest despite what virtue signaling on social media they may do. You really think people are willing to risk their 6 figure salaries for some anonymous warehouse workers...

krageon 5y ago
Your argument is that people are not lazy or ethically incompetent, but rather just straight up evil. Is that a fair characterisation? If so, I don't find it compelling.
- 0des 5y ago
  Are you addressing this part of their comment or the previous piece? > You really think people are willing to risk their 6 figure salaries for some anonymous warehouse workers...
- 5350-uiop-1130 5y ago
  No not evil. My observation is that people are pragmatic (hence, machiavelli and the arguments of moral ethics). My observation is that why should we expect highly paid tech workers to conform to some higher ideal. They have more to lose.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    I have to disagree that ehite collar folks at FAANG have more to loose. Blue Collar flks are employed at low salaries in economically weak regions, they loosr their job they risk loosing everything. Especially in the US with a non-existant social safety net. White Collar, especially tech employees, have the option to work for similar salaries somewhere else rather easily. Other than that, full agreement.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  This is Hannah Arendt's thesis behind "the banality of evil"[1]: > Arendt found Eichmann an ordinary, rather bland, bureaucrat, who in her words, was ‘neither perverted nor sadistic’, but ‘terrifyingly normal’. He acted without any motive other than to diligently advance his career. Eichmann was not an amoral monster, she concluded in her study of the case. Instead, he performed evil deeds without evil intentions, a fact connected to his ‘thoughtlessness’, a disengagement from the reality of his evil acts. Eichmann ‘never realised what he was doing’ due to an ‘inability… to think from the standpoint of somebody else’. Lacking this particular cognitive ability, he ‘commit[ted] crimes under circumstances that made it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he [was] doing wrong’. > Arendt dubbed these collective characteristics of Eichmann ‘the banality of evil’: he was not inherently evil, but merely shallow and clueless, a ‘joiner’, in the words of one contemporary interpreter of Arendt’s thesis: he was a man who drifted, in search of purpose and direction, not out of deep ideological belief. [1] https://www.britannica.com/story/what-did-hannah-arendt-really-mean-by-the-banality-of-evil https://www.britannica.com/story/what-did-hannah-arendt-real...

throw93232 5y ago

That is really dystopian stuff. Instead of electing goverment that would split monopoly, we will blame low level employees for not "resisting". Be quiet and toe the party line!!

grapeskin 5y ago
In a government elected by the people, the people can't absolve themselves of guilt when they're willingly voting for corrupt officials. In governments without elected representatives, the responsibility lies entirely with the people enforcing the oppression against those weaker than them and protecting those above. So yeah. People happily enforcing a massive wealth divide are responsible. They just don't want to accept personal responsibility because their pockets are fat. And I highly doubt they're out on the streets demanding reform to close the wealth gap and risk bringing their pay down so that those warehouse workers can live better.
- andrekandre 5y ago
  > In a government elected by the people, the people can't absolve themselves of guilt when they're willingly voting for corrupt officials. it can be said, that increasingly its representatives that are choosing (gerrymandering) thier constituents instead of the other way around, and many districts are not competitive at all (e.g no alternative candidates)

mschuster91 5y ago

> FAANG workers are really entering and sometimes fully into "just following orders" territory. The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. The thing is, Amazon, Walmart and fellow profiteers set up shop precisely where people have not much other choice than to work for them - in short, they set up shop in areas with somewhat decent traffic infrastructure, cheap real estate and lots of unemployment (and the latter two often come together). So yes, the answer to the problem that is exploitative labor practices is government regulation, as it has been for the last two centuries.

r_singh 5y ago

> ….real solution is to simply not work for them And as hard as it may be, choose to buy from them

weq 5y ago

FAANG workers are SHEEP. I live on a lakefront at 35, havnt gone into an office in 5years, had FAANG recruiters at my door since i was 21 . They like to get you young because they can then set your expectations of what work culture is. And while i am at it, LOL to the conferance culture, talk about collecting stars. Every framework needs a speaking circut so you can somehow bring the familiarty of university into your working life because you have never known anything more then this. Swallowed by the system, addicted to consuming, pushed forward by the prospect of making an impact, used and abused by capitalistic entity that courted you, young, impressionable, starry eyed.

homo_ergaster 5y ago

> The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. If you’re calling something a “real solution” it should have at least some chance of actually happening and solving the problem. Strong regulation from the government against union busting is both possible and effective (look at what FDR did if you want an example). Wishing individuals would live up to your standards of ethical behavior when they have no reason to (and may have personal/family reasons that make them feel they need the paycheck) will not ever change anything.

portpecos 5y ago

> The lame social media posts from fellow tech workers about how things "should" be regulated gets tiresome. The real solution is to simply not work for them. Just like Twitter can ban Donald Trump for using certain phrases (Steal, Election), so can Amazon ban certain words. They’re both private corporate entities. Exactly as you said, if you don’t like it, move elsewhere.