4 ms·

> A job's a job That's something that doesn't sit well with me. Not all jobs are equal. Some are unethical, or worse. And OP is in the unethical camp, at least

by tgv 4y ago

> A job's a job That's something that doesn't sit well with me. Not all jobs are equal. Some are unethical, or worse. And OP is in the unethical camp, at least by association, and also tarred by the stereotypes of exploitation and fraud. > Anyone refusing you simply because you worked in crypto at some point is short-sighted. I would also not want to hire/work with anyone who's worked for facebook or google in the past 5 years. It's not as if there was a great shortage of jobs.

charcircuit 4y ago
>I would also not want to hire/work with anyone who's worked for facebook or google in the past 5 years These companies have a plethora of things to work on and you have the ability to positively impact most of the planet (billions of people). You are oversimplifing things if you think they are all evil people who would be bad to work with.
- tgv 4y ago
  > you have the ability to positively impact most of the planet (billions of people) Hundreds of thousands of people work there, yet they haven't managed to achieve that positive impact.
  - edanm 4y ago
    In your opinion. Other people disagree. Whose opinion should they listen to? (And more in the spirit of the specific question parent raised - someone working at Facebook on funding charities. Are they "bad" for doing that job?)
    - 411111111111111 4y ago
      That's not really an opinion though. Facebook continues to ignore morality in it's chase to maximize profits.
      - charcircuit 4y ago
        Can you provide some evidence behind this claim that they ignore morality?
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    >yet they haven't managed to achieve that positive impact. You don't reach billions of users without positively impacting people who use your service. If there was no positive impact people would simply abandon Google's and Facebook's services.
    - tgv 4y ago
      “If there was no positive impact people would simply abandon meth.”
      - charcircuit 4y ago
        Yes, if there was no positive impact then basically no one new would start using meth and the meth user population would eventually die out. If you had an addictive drug and all it did was make all your teeth fall out with no extra side effects almost no one would take it. While yes, Meth is dangerous and addictive I don't think what Google and Facebook are doing is bad. How is Google giving people access to the world's data or Facebook connecting the world a bad thing? They are trying to do good things and are constantly trying to reduce the harm their services bring to people. They have entire organizations within these companies for doing so.
        tgv 4y ago
        > If you had an addictive drug and all it did was make all your teeth fall out with no extra side effects almost no one would take it. I can't help but notice that you dropped "positive" here, and I can only assume it's on purpose, as otherwise your argument would like quite silly. People using something does not mean it's positive. The list doesn't really stop at meth.
    - 9dev 4y ago
      Do you really equate product growth with a positive impact on people..? Developers working for Facebook or Google are fully aware their employer pays their salary by selling other peoples data. There is no excuse other than immorality.
  - JauntTrooper 4y ago
    You don't think Google has achieved a positive impact? Search, Maps, Gmail, YouTube, Chrome, Android, Cloud, Pixel, Nest, Fitbit, Stadia, Drive? Not to mention their other projects like DeepMind / AlphaFold?
    - tgv 4y ago
      I did mention "the last 5 years". Search is from 20 years ago. Pixel is just another phone. Fitbit, Deepmind, YouTube and Nest are not Google's. They were bought. And YouTube is a net negative impact. Android was also acquired, and that was purely to get more control over the user and their data, as was Google Docs and Gmail. Google's management of Android is frankly horrid. Their security update policy? Buy a new phone, loser, and agree to our new terms of use! Chrome isn't even an original Google project, but forked from WebKit, again with the intention to control the user and their data, and preferably wall them in. No, Google has had a negative impact on the world over the last years, and they will have it as long as they dominate the markets. And the people that work on it can see it.
- bratwurst3000 4y ago
  If the people who work there have the power to make it good … why didnt they do it the last 20 Years. Insted the collectivly build one of the worst side of internet
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    Can you describe what makes you think it's one of the worst sides of the internet? I get immense utility from Google's services using mostly free services. All of these free awesome stuff makes it one of the best sides of the internet for me.
    - bratwurst3000 4y ago
      It was more facebook. But google sucks also. You are just selling your data for a service that would cost you 10 bucks a month. And google is pushing there internet standard instead of gnu or free ones. And google has also a adnetwork that has the same harm potential as facebook … only a little less worse Edit: youtube is a win for me and i use it a lot … but its the same. I give data away that I dont want to share. I would rather pay for services than pay with data
ipaddr 4y ago
I wouldn't hire anyone who used google or facebook because they are unethical. And if I see someone wearing a brand I dislike I pour paint over them. Stereotypes are perfectly acceptable to go by in 2022.

by tgv 4y ago

charcircuit 4y ago

>I would also not want to hire/work with anyone who's worked for facebook or google in the past 5 years These companies have a plethora of things to work on and you have the ability to positively impact most of the planet (billions of people). You are oversimplifing things if you think they are all evil people who would be bad to work with.

tgv 4y ago
> you have the ability to positively impact most of the planet (billions of people) Hundreds of thousands of people work there, yet they haven't managed to achieve that positive impact.
- edanm 4y ago
  In your opinion. Other people disagree. Whose opinion should they listen to? (And more in the spirit of the specific question parent raised - someone working at Facebook on funding charities. Are they "bad" for doing that job?)
  - 411111111111111 4y ago
    That's not really an opinion though. Facebook continues to ignore morality in it's chase to maximize profits.
    - charcircuit 4y ago
      Can you provide some evidence behind this claim that they ignore morality?
- charcircuit 4y ago
  >yet they haven't managed to achieve that positive impact. You don't reach billions of users without positively impacting people who use your service. If there was no positive impact people would simply abandon Google's and Facebook's services.
  - tgv 4y ago
    “If there was no positive impact people would simply abandon meth.”
    - charcircuit 4y ago
      Yes, if there was no positive impact then basically no one new would start using meth and the meth user population would eventually die out. If you had an addictive drug and all it did was make all your teeth fall out with no extra side effects almost no one would take it. While yes, Meth is dangerous and addictive I don't think what Google and Facebook are doing is bad. How is Google giving people access to the world's data or Facebook connecting the world a bad thing? They are trying to do good things and are constantly trying to reduce the harm their services bring to people. They have entire organizations within these companies for doing so.
      - tgv 4y ago
        > If you had an addictive drug and all it did was make all your teeth fall out with no extra side effects almost no one would take it. I can't help but notice that you dropped "positive" here, and I can only assume it's on purpose, as otherwise your argument would like quite silly. People using something does not mean it's positive. The list doesn't really stop at meth.
  - 9dev 4y ago
    Do you really equate product growth with a positive impact on people..? Developers working for Facebook or Google are fully aware their employer pays their salary by selling other peoples data. There is no excuse other than immorality.
- JauntTrooper 4y ago
  You don't think Google has achieved a positive impact? Search, Maps, Gmail, YouTube, Chrome, Android, Cloud, Pixel, Nest, Fitbit, Stadia, Drive? Not to mention their other projects like DeepMind / AlphaFold?
  - tgv 4y ago
    I did mention "the last 5 years". Search is from 20 years ago. Pixel is just another phone. Fitbit, Deepmind, YouTube and Nest are not Google's. They were bought. And YouTube is a net negative impact. Android was also acquired, and that was purely to get more control over the user and their data, as was Google Docs and Gmail. Google's management of Android is frankly horrid. Their security update policy? Buy a new phone, loser, and agree to our new terms of use! Chrome isn't even an original Google project, but forked from WebKit, again with the intention to control the user and their data, and preferably wall them in. No, Google has had a negative impact on the world over the last years, and they will have it as long as they dominate the markets. And the people that work on it can see it.
bratwurst3000 4y ago
If the people who work there have the power to make it good … why didnt they do it the last 20 Years. Insted the collectivly build one of the worst side of internet
- charcircuit 4y ago
  Can you describe what makes you think it's one of the worst sides of the internet? I get immense utility from Google's services using mostly free services. All of these free awesome stuff makes it one of the best sides of the internet for me.
  - bratwurst3000 4y ago
    It was more facebook. But google sucks also. You are just selling your data for a service that would cost you 10 bucks a month. And google is pushing there internet standard instead of gnu or free ones. And google has also a adnetwork that has the same harm potential as facebook … only a little less worse Edit: youtube is a win for me and i use it a lot … but its the same. I give data away that I dont want to share. I would rather pay for services than pay with data

ipaddr 4y ago

I wouldn't hire anyone who used google or facebook because they are unethical. And if I see someone wearing a brand I dislike I pour paint over them. Stereotypes are perfectly acceptable to go by in 2022.