CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace • Hacker News Board

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#71

Post by Spooky23 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:50 PM UTC

filmgirlcw wrote: post #21

They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…

Shaming seems a little harsh.

CERN is very public about its procurements and does cross marketing agreements with many vendors. That’s well known and Facebook probably sought out CERN as a customer for this reason. When those sorts of things are done, the end of the agreement is often publicized as well, as there’s an implied endorsement.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#72

Post by JorgeGT » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:52 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #46

arethuza wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given what was invented at CERN you think Facebook would have the decency to give them a free license!

That's basically stating that influencers should get free stuff; CERN is a company that handles hundreds of millions, and I don't believe they're too poor to pay for services.

Services that are possible because that "company" chose to put the WWW in the public domain: https://cds.cern.ch/record/1164399#

Can you imagine, if CERN had patented HTML, HTTP, the Web server and the Web browser?

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#73

Post by texasbigdata » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 12:54 PM UTC

mkolodny wrote: post #34

deugtniet wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read this as an announcement of the 'why' they dropped it for their own 150 active users. There's nothing wrong with saying you stop something because it has become too expensive. It's not price shaming, it's saying that you're not willing to pay the price that has increased. It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.

There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story. I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.

Price shaming? Are we really going there?

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#74

Post by welly » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:06 PM UTC

texasbigdata wrote: post #73

mkolodny wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story. I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.

Price shaming? Are we really going there?

It sounds to me like you're comment shaming!

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#75

Post by mlthoughts2018 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:16 PM UTC

deugtniet wrote: post #24

filmgirlcw wrote: post #21

They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…

I read this as an announcement of the 'why' they dropped it for their own 150 active users. There's nothing wrong with saying you stop something because it has become too expensive. It's not price shaming, it's saying that you're not willing to pay the price that has increased. It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.

> “ It would've been price shaming if it said that it was so much money for so little services.”

That’s not price shaming, that’s just a review of something you bought that turned out to be a ripoff.

It’s a good thing if consumers talk about getting ripped off, whether it’s at a fast food joint or a big enterprise contract.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#76

Post by saalweachter » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:19 PM UTC

codeduck wrote: post #70

HenryBemis wrote: post #50

I don't see this as price shaming. I see a HUGE "we don't trust these folks to begin with...". Facebook is cancer for humanity. It gives 1 and takes 50. And then dilligently finds ways to use that 50 to hurt you, for their profit. I wouldn't trust any sensitive information with them. And especially CERN? These guys have info and tech to end life. Some random admin with god-mode that will get bribed by Saudis/ wouldn'…

> And especially CERN? These guys have info and tech to end life. Wat.

They have both hammers and phone books, I'm sure.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#77

Post by mkolodny » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:20 PM UTC

hoseja wrote: post #38

mkolodny wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing wrong with dropping an internal tool because you don't want to pay for it. Posting about it publicly is a different story. I'm not seeing why they would post about it publicly unless they wanted to put public pressure on Facebook to let them keep using it for free. To me, that's price shaming.

Glance at the site: https://home.cern/news (for example: https://home.cern/news/official-news/cern/staff-rules-and-re... ) It's basically an internal memo, except CERN posts them publicly.

Ah that's a different story. The posts do look more like internal memos. I doubt they're trying to shame Facebook for charging CERN for Workplace.

I do wonder what the person who posted this to HN's intentions were, though.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#78

Post by texasbigdata » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:27 PM UTC

welly wrote: post #74

texasbigdata wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Price shaming? Are we really going there?

It sounds to me like you're comment shaming!

Geez. I guess I'll leave your safe space and we'll both the better off.

Semantically, any discussion point that is arbitrarily elevated to outrage is now disallowed? Obviously off topic here, and ignoring certain perhaps universally accepted things that are disallowed, this stance seems stifling. The whole concept of "micro aggressions" or whatever that means.....just seems like virtue signaling. But YRMV.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#79

Post by monadic2 » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:28 PM UTC

filmgirlcw wrote: post #21

They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…

You can’t shame a company.

Re: CERN Ends Trial of Facebook Workplace

#80

Post by tflinton » Fri, Jan 31, 2020, 1:33 PM UTC

filmgirlcw wrote: post #21

They only had 150 active users (despite 1000 signups), so choosing not to pay for the offering makes sense. I have the utmost respect for CERN as an institution — I want to make that clear. What I don’t love, however, is this trend that seems to be using a PR offensive of “price shaming” whenever contract or license terms change. I understand CERN is publicly funded and that it doesn’t have an unlimited budget. But I…

I wouldn’t look negatively at price shaming. Facebook isn’t a person their a corporation. I’m sure they’re delighted about this article, for one it’s free publicity and two they’re getting valuable feedback on their product.

There’s a real value in blunt feedback, even if it occasionally hurts.