3 ms·
I'm no fan of this. While I don't know what their value and impact was—and this could have led to the team's demise. It's also Meta—I doubt they were also fully
by cptcobalt 4y ago
I'm no fan of this. While I don't know what their value and impact was—and this could have led to the team's demise. It's also Meta—I doubt they were also fully empowered to ask the right questions and push for the right change.
A company with this level of influence over the world should work to be self-calibrating: don't significantly manipulate people, block the spread of hatred, don't let unknown actors influence global politics, don't design your products in a manner that others can use them in ways you don't expect that cause people harm, etc. Does that still happen at Meta after this? I doubt it.
- itsoktocry 4y ago>While I don't know what their value and impact was Seems like that's an important piece of information to have before passing judgement on the decision, I think.
- cptcobalt 4y agoContextually, my `-and this could have led to the team's demise` was an attempt to add a fair qualifier to my statement, but probably missed the mark. I agree, but given the company, context, and reporting, the only people that would categorically know are Meta insiders, and journalists poking at them...not most casual HN commenters. :)
- bognition 4y agoI realize this doesn't need to be repeated but companies have one mission and one mission only, to make more money. Anything that works against that is a distraction. Turns out spreading hate, manipulating global politics, and exploiting humans psychology is extremely lucrative. The problem isn't misguided or unregulated corporations the problem is capitalism.