Mark Zuckerberg faces employee blowback over ruling on Trump comments

Post by jaywalk » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:04 PM UTC

petee wrote: post #64

blueterminal wrote: post #24

People really want Zuckerberg to decide whether posts of the president should be deleted or not? Is this for real? We really need mainstream decentralized applications more than ever. Thoughts of people should not be censored. Who the hell should be the truth police? You? People that have the same beliefs as you? This is just ridiculous. I don't like Facebook but great decision by Mark. Same as they decided to not re…

Calls to violence? Yes they should. Freedom isn't limitless, it demands responsibility. The same way you can't yell fire in a movie theater. Inciting people to violence and threatening that same free speech of others, particularly from someone with the biggest soap box in the world, is unacceptable in our country. I thought we decided that years ago

Post by ethagnawl » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:04 PM UTC

pdimitar wrote: post #57

I think we all know he is not "facing" anything. People that collect big and stable salaries will not change company employment over this. Virtue signalling is cheap, endangering your family's livelihood is hard. "It's very difficult to make somebody understand something, especially if their salary depends on them not understanding it." Facebook is, in general, an unethical company. And this has been known for a long…

Post by darkarmani » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

lgleason wrote: post #114

Zuck get's it. Start censoring, editorializing etc. and section 230 protections will be gutted. On top of that anti-trust investigations intensify, rightfully, because you have not concentrated too much power into an un-regulated, un-elected platform vs the elected government which is against the interest of the country as a whole. For all of the engineers complaining about this, there are plenty of other ones who wo…

Post by rswail » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

drevil-v2 wrote: post #52

jhowell wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your opinion whose view best represents "the population as a whole," and what percentage of the conversation does their opinion represent?

Billions of users. I would imagine it is the entire spectrum of political and cultural opinions. Pro-live/Pro-choice. Religious/Atheist. Traditional/Multicultural.

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 01, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

city41 wrote: post #173

mjayhn wrote: post #7

People on twitter at other $bigtech seem more than happy to bring you all on board but you've been sucking that $270k+ top-end-even-for-FAANG salary with no concern for the ethics or morality of your business for years. This isn't new. I'm less than excited to see Facebook show up on a resume and haven't been for years. Not to mention the people I've interviewed from there seem to get so accustomed to working on Face…

Do you believe you don't need to compromise morals to work at Google? They're not the most wholesome of companies. You pretty much need to compromise some morals to work just about anywhere. Just Facebook stands out as being more than most places in this regard. Your rant is unhelpful and applies broad stereotypes and assumptions to a lot of people. You also strongly imply you've never worked at a SV company, so you…