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

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#321

Post by atomical » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:52 AM UTC

arunv wrote: post #226

freyir wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 aro…

I personally know many people that stayed / have stayed 9-10 years at Facebook, long after the IPO and long after vesting. I think people really underestimate the value of sheer impact on end users. I know the news about FB hasn't been positive, but as an engineer a lot of people would jump at the opportunity to literally change the world every month.

How is Facebook changing the world? If anything, the world seems to be changing around Facebook.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#322

Post by adjkant » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:53 AM UTC

matchbok wrote: post #309

adjkant wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I specifically included, very deliberately, phrasing specifying that this applies only to those that have alternatives. The reality is that many of those working at Facebook have such a luxury. I absolutely do not blame people that are working to survive. > But to suggest minimum wage earners working at Marlboro should quit because of some vague "morality" is insane and extremely elitist. Not once did I say this anyw…

Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider. Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning. There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy.…

> Many work at FB have that luxury? How can you prove that? You can't. > Someone's salary is not a measure to use when attacking them for not resigning.

You don't resign out of the blue, you start looking and interviewing at other places. People with the talent or resume to get hired at Facebook currently do have that ability and should be valued on the current job market.

> That's a judgement call on your part, and a bad one at that. You have absolutely no insight into the work/life issues those workers need to consider.

Okay, so you're just boiling this down to "my judgement is better than yours without evidence" then? If no person can have any insight into anyone ever, how would we ever act on any information or situation? Assumptions and judgements must not be made blindly but they do need to be made in an informed manner. Why you discount my perspective on them without reason is another matter.

> There is no valid argument to support the claim that Marlboro executives should resign because cigarettes are unhealthy. People resigning does exactly nothing to the market demand for cigarettes.

They literally created the market demand through their suppression of information. The argument is not at all "cigarettes are unhealthy", it's that they should not be marketed and supported in the motives of profit above morality.

Please stop rephrasing my arguments to fit your assumptions. I'd love to have a real discussion here instead of talking past each other.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#323

Post by mbesto » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:53 AM UTC

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!

> I read these things and would never sign something like that.

Ya, everyone does until they look at their bank account.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#324

Post by mirimir » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:55 AM UTC

habeebtc wrote: post #316

mirimir wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 be…

Wasn't it the culture he built which led to the many iterations of permissions which were intentionally confusing in order to get you to share everything more publicly than you thought you were? See: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34825225/ns/technology_and_science...

Yes, I think so too. But it sounds like he's renounced that. And of course, it could be bullshit to deflect criticism.

Even so, I've done lots of work with est / Landmark Education, and some with Lifespring, Tony Robbins and NLP. So I'm familiar with concepts of building relationships with family and friends, and broader social networking and community building. And a major aspect of that it honesty and open sharing, both 1:1 and in groups. it helps us see how much we're all the same, and builds empathy and love.

So when he talks about social hacking through sharing and strengthening relationships, I hear it through those filters. But I also hear his cynical comments about oversharing fools that sucks into Facebook.

so anyway, I'm curious where this will go. Facebook now allows signups via Tor, apparently with no texted authentication. And if he creates a privacy-frirndly version that emphasiuzes P2P communuication, that woutld be very cool.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#325

Post by throwaway_9168 » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:57 AM UTC

emtel wrote: post #303

shosko wrote: post #145

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.

The people who believe facebook is the most evil company in the world are a fairly small minority. Most people who work at facebook believe the company is positive or neutral, and are happy to be able to work with smart people at a place that is really nice to work at, and get paid a lot for doing it. Some people have qualms about what facebook is doing - I think they move on for the most part. (Source: used to work…

There was also a time when Facebook was just a random website run from a dorm room. Just like Facebook itself grew, so will the group of people who dislike it. And the trend can only go in one direction, because as Tim Cook said "If I were running Facebook, I wouldn't be in this situation".

>>Most people who work at facebook believe the company is positive or neutral

Yeah, you can be smart without having any guts (to demand change). That many Facebook employees still believe the company is positive or neutral is a good example of this.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#326

Post by creato » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 4:59 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #263

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you got paid what he is getting paid to keep your mouth shut, I think you would.

doubtful. he's already got f-u money. a couple million more doesn't matter. what's probably more likely is that his net worth is highly correlated with facebook's, and disparagement could materially affect that.

Maybe he simply isn't that confident in that opinion to state it so bluntly. I agree with the "reading between the lines" interpretation that this guy probably thinks facebook is a bad thing. But, thinking that, and coming out strongly with that position while holding such an influential position are two very different things.

If I had such influence I'd certainly be hesitant to just go all guns blazing, and I'm someone that strongly believes social media (primarily facebook) is a serious threat to civilized society.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#327

Post by bryan_w » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 5:02 AM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #279

joe_the_user wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Perhaps, but that person is responding to another about the impact Facebook has on society, good or bad, and that person only highlights the good essentially." But that's the structure of any logical argument. If someone says X is only A , I will describe how I see plenty of B in X, which by itself doesn't say there is not plenty of A in X too. IE, One person makes a generalization, another points to an exception or…

> ... then neither should the hate be justified? The hate is because they collect so much data, and share and sell it so carelessly. Google collects at least as much data, for sure. But as far as I know, they just monetize it through their ad services, and don't actually provide it to others.

Facebook doesn't sell data either. They monetize it just the same as google

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#328

Post by DataJunkie » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 5:02 AM UTC

prewett wrote: post #211

DataJunkie wrote: post #71

I used to be a fan of Facebook, but I was never obsessed with it. I even used to work there. I'm over it. It's useful for groups, some of the ads really are useful, it's nice to sometimes keep up with people that are far away, but the news feed has had done way more harm than good for our society, including my own life. After the 2016 Election, Facebook posts lead to so much drama in my family that certain "branches"…

If the only reason you want the company to succeed is because you own stock, that sounds like a good reason to not own the stock. Besides, if other people start feeling the way you do, the stock is not likely to do very well, so if you believe your feeling is representative, you might want to consider it a sell signal.

I agree. I am not good at the stock market.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#329

Post by creato » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 5:04 AM UTC

tathougies wrote: post #288

yaseer wrote: post #168

Facebook is big tobacco. Intelligent people generating profits that knowingly harms society (even if you do get some joy from a cigarette, that doesn't justify working for a tobacco company). I really hope the smart people at Facebook see the obvious parallel, and choose another career. History will judge you.

I feel comparing big tobacco to a service that lets you talk with your friends and keep a timeline of your life is a bit disproportionate.

Most of my friends that still smoke will straight up tell you the only reason they do it is for the social interactions that happen while smoking. I don't think it's that different.

Re: Facebook Loses Top Executives, Including Chris Cox

#330

Post by DataJunkie » Fri, Mar 15, 2019, 5:05 AM UTC

mullingitover wrote: post #268

DataJunkie wrote: post #71

I used to be a fan of Facebook, but I was never obsessed with it. I even used to work there. I'm over it. It's useful for groups, some of the ads really are useful, it's nice to sometimes keep up with people that are far away, but the news feed has had done way more harm than good for our society, including my own life. After the 2016 Election, Facebook posts lead to so much drama in my family that certain "branches"…

> There is no way to turn this part of the feed off. Unfollow everyone, and you don't get sucked into interacting with the facebook feed. Use it for Messenger, groups, and events. I've been doing that, and facebook is a perfectly good communication utility without any of the grief. Honestly, we as users should demand a simple switch that entirely disables the feed. It turns facebook from a socially messy skinner box…

I don't care about seeing other people's comments, but I'd like to be able to prevent people seeing my comments on other peoples' posts unless it is a mutual friend or something. No matter what it is I comment on, a news article, or a group post, and my dad (and I am sure other FB friends) see it even if we aren't connected to the same groups and sites.