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

Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 444 posts

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#321

Post by blub »

Panini_Jones wrote: post #271
zippzom wrote: post #268

Personal anecdote: I had a job offer from Facebook and a couple other big tech companies. The Facebook offer was substantially better fiscally than the other ones and it was clear to me that they were having trouble hiring. Their initial equity grant has no cliff and the signing bonus was massive for somebody two years out of school: $75,000 cash in first paycheck. However I ultimately turned it down because of ethic…

> Their initial equity grant has no cliff and the signing bonus was massive for somebody two years out of school: $75,000 cash in first paycheck. * Google got rid of the cliff too. * The $75K sign-on bonus is nothing new. These are not signals that we're having trouble hiring now. > However I ultimately turned it down because of ethical concerns about working there combined with a sense that people would not approve…

A timely commit, because at this rate Fb will soon be just as cool to work for as big tobacco and bragging about all the awesome "cancer-causing" projects will be kinda awkward.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#322

Post by holoduke »

I believe (strong personal assumption) that this is something not only for Facebook, but also for Google and Apple. Back 3 years ago, a lot of people from my network had dreams to work for Google or Facebook . Today it's no longer the case. They demand a company who is serious about things like privacy, environment. Things like career possibilities are still important, but so many companies these days offer similar work experience. Surprisingly I hear more and more positive news coming from old evil: Microsoft.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#323

Post by pat2man »

holoduke wrote: post #322

I believe (strong personal assumption) that this is something not only for Facebook, but also for Google and Apple. Back 3 years ago, a lot of people from my network had dreams to work for Google or Facebook . Today it's no longer the case. They demand a company who is serious about things like privacy, environment. Things like career possibilities are still important, but so many companies these days offer similar w…

Isn't Apple serious about privacy and the environment?

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#324

Post by smsm42 »

mrtksn wrote: post #64
clairity wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "It's telling that a substantial portion of our candidates admitted to considering competing offers from Google, but literally no one was considering Facebook." intersting anecdote. google is a bigger concern for privacy and personal liberty, yet jobseekers are shunning facebook because of the more wide-ranging negative press.

>google is a bigger concern for privacy and personal liberty Big claim. Any proofs? With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are. Extremely worrisome if you prefer to have people elected through a democratic process that is based on the discussion. This is not like understanding what people want or how do…

> With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are.

That sounds like a behavior of a honest service provider. Worse behavior would be if they'd help candidates which match their political biases, but work against candidates that disagree with them. That would look like abusing their position of a steward of a world-wide platform.

> With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are.

Isn't political campaigning part of the discussion? If so, why is it bad to give candidates equal access to tools to perform this campaigning? Would you begrudge a printer that would print signs for any candidate, no matter who they are? If not, how electronic signs are functionally different from printed ones?

> everything is happening violently.

I feel people are really abusing the word "violently" nowdays. Nothing that happens on facebook is violence, it's mostly just talk.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#325

Post by smsm42 »

nathanlied wrote: post #192
mrtksn wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>google is a bigger concern for privacy and personal liberty Big claim. Any proofs? With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are. Extremely worrisome if you prefer to have people elected through a democratic process that is based on the discussion. This is not like understanding what people want or how do…

> With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are. (EU citizen here): I would prefer corporations (especially ones with such depth of funds and breadth of influence) be kept entirely outside the electoral process. If that's not feasible, then the second best option is, indeed, that they provide the same serv…

> I would prefer corporations (especially ones with such depth of funds and breadth of influence) be kept entirely outside the electoral process.

Do you mean corporations being banned from providing services to any electoral campaign? Probably not, because in that case election campaign would be impossible. If so, then Facebook would be free to provide promotion services to any political campaign too - they are service provider as any other.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#326

Post by pferde »

Barrin92 wrote: post #142
pferde wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any communication platform that is easy to use and easy to reach people on, and will therefore be popular, is great channel of dissemination of fake news. Well, guess what, it is also a great channel for communicating nonfake news, and talking to people that matter to you, and sharing your interests with likeminded people, and... Blaming the platform for carrying fake news seems disingenuous. Fake news have been spre…

I think one needs to be very intentionally oblivious to not notice the qualitative difference between fake news of the past and fake news right now. Fake news in the past always had an identifiable source, because there was still an institution, a company, or someone with their name on the door between reader and publisher. As it stands, no such barrier exists any more. Things can be inserted by malicious actors into…

Yes, the Internet has made spreading fake news easier, but let me reiterate my argument - the Internet has made communication as a whole easier, so it's only natural that fake news spreads easier. However, that is not the fault of any given communication platform on the Internet, unless that platform happens to explicitly select fake news stories to spread, and suppress anything else. Which certainly is not case for WhatsApp.

Even in the past, good old rumor mills (I heard it from a friend of a friend of a cousin's barber) were reigning supreme in spreading bullshit around, by simple word of mouth. The Internet here is just a compounding factor to something that is very, very old and already very, very effective.

Edit: expanded first paragraph

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#327

Post by smsm42 »

arcticbull wrote: post #275
nathanlied wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With Facebook, what annoyed me was that they set up internal teams to help with political candidates social media campaigns - no matter who the candidates are. (EU citizen here): I would prefer corporations (especially ones with such depth of funds and breadth of influence) be kept entirely outside the electoral process. If that's not feasible, then the second best option is, indeed, that they provide the same serv…

My ideal system is to eliminate all private money from elections. You as a candidate are given a stipend by the FEC at the beginning of the campaign season, the same amount as any other candidate for the same office, and you are free to spend it. You ran out? Tough. See you next election cycle. Nobody is allowed to give you money or anything else of value (including free airtime) -- not individuals, not companies, ju…

> Nobody is allowed to give you money or anything else of value

That sounds like a form of extreme boycott - and however I despise politicians in general, subjecting them to essentially expulsion from the society (at least temporarily until the election ends) and complete gag order and media blackout (because otherwise I could promote a candidate without giving them money directly - I would just publish ads under my own name but would be praising the candidate in them) just for wanting to be elected seems a bit extreme to me. Not to say at least in the US it's probably incompatible with at least half of the constitutional amendments.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#328

Post by Vinnl »

citrablue wrote: post #220
GCA10 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google makes a lot of genuinely useful products and services. We've all got to wrestle with the privacy tradeoffs of "free" maps, "free" email, "free" Android, etc. But at least the satisfaction of using well-built tools to accomplish more is enough of an offset to many people. Facebook is much more likely to be seen as a guilty pleasure, or a marvelous time-waster, or something else that's a bit farther down the uti…

Perhaps in some countries/demos. I'd bet Instagram and WhatsApp for free, basic communication are seen as much higher utility in a significant amount of the global population.

But much of that utility comes from the fact that everyone uses it, rather than some inherent quality of the product, like is the case for Maps. Feeling somewhat "forced" to use it does not help with a positive view of the company.

Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal

#329

Post by taurath »

mathattack wrote: post #302
taurath wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sheryl hired the swiftboat campaigners to stop Congress. Finding out about that made me assume that over time most of their employees would trend in the opposite direction of optimistic.

Wow! Source?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-data-...

The person who runs Definers Public Affairs, Matt Rhoades was the opposition research director for Bush/Cheney 04.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definers_Public_Affairs

https://definersdc.com/team/matt-rhoades/

> In 2004, he played a critical role in President George W. Bush’s winning re-election campaign, serving as the Research Director for Bush-Cheney ’04, where he helped develop the campaign’s opposition research, message development and rapid response operations.

The oppo research director of the campaign can have no official links to the 527 group, of course. But the group exists for one reason only - to discredit political opponents.

Post reply on HN