Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#181

Post by resters » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:25 PM UTC

o10449366 wrote: post #118

whalesalad wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe anyone was unable to see through the bullshit on FB from the very very beginning. Does ANYONE there now, or at any time in the past, have any real belief that what they're doing is connecting the world? It's a money making machine, plain and simple. (Money making machines are not bad, as long as there is never any dog and pony show about being some higher form of existence) I think that the people lea…

It's easy to believe the bullshit when that money machine is funding your six figure salary, free meals, unlimited vacation, recreational and health services, and 401K and Roth. That's why there are engineers at Google right now working on a censorship machine at the directive of the Chinese government. I find it highly doubtful that they would still believe the project is a net good on the world and not motivated by…

> That's why there are engineers at Google right now working on a censorship machine at the directive of the Chinese government

It's already been built for the US government, so why not profit by selling a US supervised version to the Chinese? Better than China building its own tech.

I think you underestimate the degree to which Google is a top defense contractor and in building this stuff for China is acting at the behest of the US Government.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#182

Post by stingraycharles » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:26 PM UTC

dunkelheit wrote: post #129

stingraycharles wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He might be complicit, but maybe he was trying to change the direction. Those two things should be treated separately.

This is what I am trying to understand - why do people feel that he was trying to change the direction? If e.g. Zuck would say something like that everybody would just ignore him.

I think it has more to do with high skepticism towards Zuckerberg. Combine that with lots of internal struggles and high level executives that openly stood up against Zuckerberg, and Chris Cox comes out as a hero by default.

At least, it’s probably something along these lines.

In the end we don’t have enough information, and probably never will.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#183

Post by zimablue » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:28 PM UTC

avinium wrote: post #132

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'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.

Maybe the answer is just to make them illegal.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#184

Post by blackoil » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:31 PM UTC

GuiA wrote: post #171

manigandham wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

Well, the people who argue that these networks have an overall negative impact have plenty of examples to draw from - ranging from the last US election, to the genocide in Myanmar, the extremely fine ad targeting it enables perpetuating sociology economical discrimination, etc. People who argue for its value mostly point to the fact that grandma can see pictures of the kids and other pedestrian examples of things tha…

How do we know that examples are not polluted by the biases. Not so long ago FB/Twitter was hailed for its role in Obama's campaign and Arab Spring. It is still being used same except now we don't like the side using it.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#185

Post by scn76 » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:34 PM UTC

whalesalad wrote: post #109

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…

I can't believe anyone was unable to see through the bullshit on FB from the very very beginning. Does ANYONE there now, or at any time in the past, have any real belief that what they're doing is connecting the world? It's a money making machine, plain and simple. (Money making machines are not bad, as long as there is never any dog and pony show about being some higher form of existence) I think that the people lea…

It doesn't really matter who leaves.

These are people who were part of the first scaling out of single platform to 2 billion people. Their skill was in building out such a network and keeping it running. The skills required to do that well, came from people with business and compsci backgrounds. That work is done.

Now what matters is who joins. And what happens next to such a network.

Compsci and biz people won't make a difference to vision. The next phase will be driven by ideas from social sciene, ecology, history, psychology, economics, politics, religion etc. People who have a deep understanding of the value of human networks and what they can do, will drive the next chapter of where Facebook goes.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#186

Post by Zhyl » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:35 PM UTC

mjfl wrote: post #177

madeofpalk wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Cool. In other developing countries it lead to a massacre.

You're deranged.

It's actually well documented that Facebook enabled and inflamed the Rhingya genocide in Myanmar. Here is an example article but there are many more:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/facebook-role-rohingy...

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#187

Post by andybak » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:35 PM UTC

mjfl wrote: post #177

madeofpalk wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Cool. In other developing countries it lead to a massacre.

You're deranged.

Rather than a 2 word post how about you write a balanced comment on the reported events in India and Myanmar which the parent post referenced giving a more nuanced account of events.

The right way to counter a brief, sweeping comment isn't an even briefer and more sweeping comment.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#188

Post by ahartmetz » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:37 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #125

rkho wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see that quote being referenced a lot, and given when it was made I'm curious what it says about whether or not we believe that people have the capacity to change.

Do something mildly stupid when you're 20, and if someone finds out about it when you're 40, you lose your job. That's the upside-down society we live in today.

Such is life in the age of post-privacy. By the way, Zuck didn't explicitly renounce that horseshit when he announced the new privacy-focused Facebook. Probably hoping nobody remembers to avoid detracting from the believability of the current horseshit.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#189

Post by freyir » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:38 PM UTC

arunv wrote: post #69

tyre wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook has the strongest culture in the valley For a company so regularly beset by scandal, this feels like a bold assertion. Culture of what?

Any other company in their shoes would have had a mass exodus. Chris was a big part of making employees feel like they shared a piece of the dream. Whatever your thoughts about Facebook, the fact that some of the smartest people have worked, and continue to work at a company "beset by scandal" should give you pause.

Money.

They pay many people salaries that they’d have trouble getting elsewhere. If these people stick around for the dream even after the money dries up, then I’ll be impressed.

The sentiment I’ve heard so far is “let’s wait this out, and hope it goes back to business as usual.”

The ethical have likely left already. Those who are most talented and in it for the money will likely be next out, if things don’t turn around. Then they’re left with the untalented and overpaid, who will cling on for as long as possible while the ship sinks.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#190

Post by mirimir » Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 11:39 PM UTC

CharlesW wrote: post #165

passn wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

> For all of us, Facebook is definitely a good thing. And also a bad thing, is a major theme of the parent comment you replied to. "Lie" is a stark word for what Zuck is doing, but it's not wrong assuming he understands the dark side of his monster. But he also may not know if he's actively deluding himself, and eliminating everyone around him that doesn't support that pretend worldview.

As much as I distrust his motives, there is this in TFA:

> Now, Mr. Zuckerberg is barreling ahead with his shift to focus Facebook on private messaging and away from public broadcasting, even if it means shedding some of his top lieutenants.

That sounds a lot like "understand[ing] the dark side of his monster". Maybe an extreme overreaction, it's true. But a clear acknowledgment that "sharing will make the world a better place" is rather too idealistic.

Edit: spelling