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

Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 414 posts

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#141

Post by tanilama »

ordinaryradical wrote: post #24

I just don't understand how anyone can believe his vision for "a privacy-focused social network" is even possible this late in the game. There is too much money riding precisely on the reductions of privacy Facebook has enabled for this to be realistic anymore. The ad dollars come from knowing you, not concealing you. Plus, once you're a public company, the rules change—you have shareholders to honor—and if you got t…

Just announcing a diet version of news feed. That is it. Slowly routing traffic to that new facade. They don't have to something super revolutionary, just bit by bit.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#142

Post by congressonndas »

Jach wrote: post #136
kjar wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A non-disparagement clause is so fucking bonkers. I read these things and would never sign something like that. It’s a blatant corporate attack on your freedom of speech and absolutely insulting as a human. You pay me. You do not control me!

> You pay me. You do not control me! That's why these things come with payment -- or for NDAs, a threat to make you pay them.

Check out what Ted Lieu, Representative from the LA area, had to say about NDAs:

https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1105961668029358086

> @tedlieu I am authorized to make the following statement: If you feel silenced by an NDA and need help from a Congressional committee, please contact, or have your attorney contact, the House Judiciary Committee.

——-

For topics of societal and national concern, House subpoenas could be a good way to force disclosure — of things companies are trying to hide, via paying off employees in exchange for NDAs.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#143

Post by passn »

mindgam3 wrote: post #61

I've known Chris Cox since freshman year of college and he was an informal advisor to my first startup. The NYT article referenced in hashberry's earlier comment includes a key quote: “For over a decade, I’ve been sharing the same message that Mark and I have always believed: Social media’s history is not yet written, and its effects are not neutral,” Mr. Cox said in a note to employees on Thursday. “As its builders…

"Zuckerberg's vision of Facebook as a good thing for the world was a lie" - That is such a broad generalization. In the developing world where I live Facebook gives me the opportunity to maintain contact with my family who live on the other side of the world, as I walk the streets of São Paulo, for free. There are hundreds of millions of others like me who keep in contact with their family because of Facebook (and the companies they own). The alternative (cel phone calls and sms) is literally an inch away on our smartphone, but it is such bad quality and so expensive its unusable. For all of us, Facebook is definitely a good thing.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#144

Post by Jach »

j-c-hewitt wrote: post #135
avinium wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong. But ethics can become a lot more flexible when someone's dangling a few million in stock options in front of your face.

Flip it around. If you are an employee partly compensated in stock, is it fair for a multi-billionaire who was one of your former bosses to flippantly trash talk the company in public after he cashes out, potentially damaging the value of your stock...? Wouldn't you want your employer to put some controls into place to prevent that kind of pointless harm to you? You can still talk about literally anything else if you…

> You can still talk about literally anything else if you sign a non-disparagement clause or an NDA.

Why does this matter? It reminds me of the joke about how in America we value free speech so much that we can badmouth our leaders in public, but so what, in Soviet Russia they can badmouth the American leaders in public too. The question of how free your speech is, is determined by what you can't say, or can't get away with saying, without paying some hefty consequence (a punch, a fine, losing your job, imprisonment, forfeiting RSUs...).

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#145

Post by shosko »

Why would anyone want to work for Facebook these days? When you are maintaining the largest advertising stream since TV while actively destroying society's discourse, I'm not sure what redeeming qualities it has. I think the most important thing any of us can do is get away from Facebook and move towards pursuits that fix problems, including the ones Facebook helped create.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#146

Post by PunchTornado »

passn wrote: post #143
mindgam3 wrote: post #61

I've known Chris Cox since freshman year of college and he was an informal advisor to my first startup. The NYT article referenced in hashberry's earlier comment includes a key quote: “For over a decade, I’ve been sharing the same message that Mark and I have always believed: Social media’s history is not yet written, and its effects are not neutral,” Mr. Cox said in a note to employees on Thursday. “As its builders…

"Zuckerberg's vision of Facebook as a good thing for the world was a lie" - That is such a broad generalization. In the developing world where I live Facebook gives me the opportunity to maintain contact with my family who live on the other side of the world, as I walk the streets of São Paulo, for free. There are hundreds of millions of others like me who keep in contact with their family because of Facebook (and th…

exactly, plus for my elderly parents facebook has opened another world. Internet and google is too complex for them.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#147

Post by [deleted] »

kjar wrote: post #122
mindgam3 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“if he felt like Facebook was bending things the wrong way he'd say so” I wish that were true, but this is a rather naive perspective. Facebook has a well documented history of requiring outgoing employees to sign non-disparagement clauses. For someone as high up as Chief Product Officer you’d better believe that they would have Chris sign something expressly forbidding any overt criticism of the company. Any severan…

A non-disparagement clause is so fucking bonkers. I read these things and would never sign something like that. It’s a blatant corporate attack on your freedom of speech and absolutely insulting as a human. You pay me. You do not control me!

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#148

Post by manigandham »

mindgam3 wrote: post #61

I've known Chris Cox since freshman year of college and he was an informal advisor to my first startup. The NYT article referenced in hashberry's earlier comment includes a key quote: “For over a decade, I’ve been sharing the same message that Mark and I have always believed: Social media’s history is not yet written, and its effects are not neutral,” Mr. Cox said in a note to employees on Thursday. “As its builders…

Or maybe people are complicated and they use tools to connect and amplify natural behavior. All this digital technology and instant communication with everyone is still very new and the human species is still learning how to best use it. If Facebook didn't exist then something else would've taken its place. This is part of technological progress and similar things happened with the invention of radio, tv and telecom.

It's very presumptuous to think a single person or company knows better than the entire world on whether something is "good" or not.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#149

Post by 908087 »

ENGNR wrote: post #100
hashberry wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some theories: 1. Rebranding Facebook as secure and private 2. If this increases usage, more opportunity to display ads 3. Their data shows they gain more information by monitoring what people publicly share, not say in private 4. Removes all responsibility to work with law enforcement and governments for illegal activity, since it's encrypted

A common feature request for my app: remove FB login! These are users who didn't even use it. But just seeing the Facebook login option there next to email (it was the only OAuth) gave them the creeps. These aren't tech savvy users either, just regular small town businesses I think Facebook has a long, long, long way to go towards brand repair before anyone can 'trust' it in any way

The use of Facebook login immediately makes me suspicious of any site/service's overall security and privacy practices.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#150

Post by joelrunyon »

mindgam3 wrote: post #61

I've known Chris Cox since freshman year of college and he was an informal advisor to my first startup. The NYT article referenced in hashberry's earlier comment includes a key quote: “For over a decade, I’ve been sharing the same message that Mark and I have always believed: Social media’s history is not yet written, and its effects are not neutral,” Mr. Cox said in a note to employees on Thursday. “As its builders…

> encourages all employees to bend it towards the good

The problem is this means something different to every employee.

Post reply on HN