Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 136 posts

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#81

Post by basch »

fbthrowaway3 wrote: post #53

Going anon here, for obvious reasons. People rationalize it two ways: 1. Whataboutism. Yeah, well, what about Google? What about Amazon? 2. Whatever, they pay me well and the perks are good. My view is more nihilistic: Zuck is the same as he's always been. This is the same dude who said "They trust me, dumb fucks". Don't get it twisted: Facebook is about data collection and data sales. Everything else is a happy smok…

At some point, there is more to care about than money. He has plenty. He has more power than almost anyone in the world. Now he cares about legacy and impact on the world. Once he is gone, what is he remembered for, what change did he lead.

I dont think he is the same person, because he has it all now, and could walk away and never work another second in his life. He legitimately wants to make the world a better place for himself to live in.

That said "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Just because he wants to make change, doesnt meant he goes about it in the right way. And because of the way the media treats him, everything out of his mouth is PR approved double speak.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#82

Post by CompanionCuuube »

badfrog wrote: post #64
throwawaysow wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument sounds a lot like gaslighting. You can put this argument for any unethical company and it would work.

> This argument sounds a lot like gaslighting. That's just a matter of whether you think OP truly believes what they said.

"It's not a lie, if you believe it!" - George Costanza

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#83

Post by badfrog »

CompanionCuuube wrote: post #82
badfrog wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This argument sounds a lot like gaslighting. That's just a matter of whether you think OP truly believes what they said.

"It's not a lie, if you believe it!" - George Costanza

Indeed. You can be wrong without lying.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#84

Post by basch »

EngineerBetter wrote: post #75
basch wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a tool right, and from a usability, stability, security, and functionality perspective its second to none. No other program (for me) works more seamlessly between desktop and mobile. It's messaging app is first class. Tons of features. I can type a message on a pc, and carry my phone with me and pick up where I left off. It's groups allow people to self organize, at a scale I dont see anywhere else. It's newsfee…

Thanks for the critique of Facebook as a technical implementation. I was curious as to what societal good the company and its products have done. It sounds like "saved people a bit of time by doing all the things separate services used to do".

Basically. That and "an archive of my history," a data repository of photos and contacts. Some of the "good" is people finally feeling like the found a terminal place to store things without it disappearing.

Facebook is glorified AIM+Webshots+Digg. The only thing it did different than most of those other products is successfully make the transition to mobile. Most other companies got replaced by mobile clones. Instagram almost did it, became the mobile Webshots, but FB swallowed them.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#85

Post by badfrog »

warp_factor wrote: post #74
badfrog wrote: post #30

I worked at FB for three years as a software engineer. The people I worked with basically believed: 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society 2) Most of the negative articles about Facebook are based on some piece of truth but go out of their way to make things seem worse and more sinister than they really are 3) Zuck generally wants to do the right thing, but of course makes mistakes 4) Yes the compan…

I disagree with all of those, but more specifically with >> 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society. Definitely not. If you had to put a numerical value on Facebook impact on society, it would be extremely negative I think. You grab attention of weak users, that end up spending so much time on your platform doing nothing instead of contributing in things that would benefit society. You create an illu…

> The only reason why you get away with all of this is because it is so difficult to put an actual number on those.

It's equally difficult to put numbers on the positive effects, which can be anything from enjoying a joke to organizing a protest of an oppressive government to preventing a suicide.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#86

Post by russh »

badfrog wrote: post #85
warp_factor wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with all of those, but more specifically with >> 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society. Definitely not. If you had to put a numerical value on Facebook impact on society, it would be extremely negative I think. You grab attention of weak users, that end up spending so much time on your platform doing nothing instead of contributing in things that would benefit society. You create an illu…

> The only reason why you get away with all of this is because it is so difficult to put an actual number on those. It's equally difficult to put numbers on the positive effects, which can be anything from enjoying a joke to organizing a protest of an oppressive government to preventing a suicide.

Or simply live casting the torture of a mentally challenged individual.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#87

Post by [deleted] »

warp_factor wrote: post #79
basch wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"how bad the product is" What makes facebook so much worse than email? The fact that its default sorting algorithm is based on how relevant it thinks stories are to your interests? Any spread of false information could happen basically as easily through gmail. I dont see people getting mad at gmail and outlook for allowing chain letters to keep existing.

The utility_function of facebook (what it maximizes for) is for your attention grab. This in itself makes the product bad. They will hack the endorphin in your brain in order to keep you hooked. the utility_function of email is utilitarian. No email server wants to keep their user hooked on their emails.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#88

Post by deanmoriarty »

warp_factor wrote: post #74
badfrog wrote: post #30

I worked at FB for three years as a software engineer. The people I worked with basically believed: 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society 2) Most of the negative articles about Facebook are based on some piece of truth but go out of their way to make things seem worse and more sinister than they really are 3) Zuck generally wants to do the right thing, but of course makes mistakes 4) Yes the compan…

I disagree with all of those, but more specifically with >> 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society. Definitely not. If you had to put a numerical value on Facebook impact on society, it would be extremely negative I think. You grab attention of weak users, that end up spending so much time on your platform doing nothing instead of contributing in things that would benefit society. You create an illu…

As I said in a previous comment, I'd be curious if this "wasting time instead of contributing to society" applies also to other entertainment companies that quite literally waste thousands of hours a year of the average weak person, such as Netflix, which instead is typically seen as providing very positive value to society.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#89

Post by badfrog »

deanmoriarty wrote: post #88
warp_factor wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with all of those, but more specifically with >> 1) The core product is good and useful to people/society. Definitely not. If you had to put a numerical value on Facebook impact on society, it would be extremely negative I think. You grab attention of weak users, that end up spending so much time on your platform doing nothing instead of contributing in things that would benefit society. You create an illu…

As I said in a previous comment, I'd be curious if this "wasting time instead of contributing to society" applies also to other entertainment companies that quite literally waste thousands of hours a year of the average weak person, such as Netflix, which instead is typically seen as providing very positive value to society.

Yeah, it kind of implies that you should spend 100% of your waking time being "productive", which is not realistic. Everybody needs time to recharge, and depending on your personality, that can be anything from going to a bar with friends, to playing recreational sports, to watching TV, to scrolling through the internet.

Re: Ask HN: Current and former FB employees, what's the other side to the story?

#90

Post by librish »

untog wrote: post #80
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, the scenario was this. Facebook allowed people to voluntarily share their data with a large number of third-party apps, including one called "This Is Your Digital Life". This was a popular feature; lots of people wanted to share their data in order to get quiz results and such. The guy who created "This Is Your Digital Life" said the data was only for his academic research, but it was secretly for Cambri…

Some clarifications: - Facebook allowed people to share their data and the data of their friends with third parties. So there was no requirement for me to use My Digital Life, or to accept a single permission prompt, in order for the researcher to have access to my data. - people didn't "want to share their data", they wanted their quiz results. Was every bit of the data they provided required in order to get the qui…

But this is similar to any phone/email/contact book app will allow you to upload or manage your address book. Your friends could leak your email address or phone number by installing a malicious app and granting the permission, do you blame Google/Apple for this?
Post reply on HN