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

Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 96 posts

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#81

Post by jasonv »

koheripbal wrote: post #58
ergodicity001 wrote: post #31

I saw a video recently where someone was discussing Facebook's "moat". Essentially, among Big Tech, it has the least defensible moat, which I think is true. https://youtu.be/4SrxqfKn9Bw?t=1605 I think Facebook has very little choice right now. Libra could have been a moat, but it is more or less dead now. They are being cornered into being more pro-conservative, because otherwise their moat (engagement, which is what…

I question whether advertisers really care about public ethical issues, and won't just quietly restore Ad spending when covid is over. Virtue signaling is cheap. Is there any evidence that they've specifically cut more from Facebook than from other social media platforms?

If marketing departments do the work to direct their efforts and funds to other advertising channels, they may keep using them even after the virtue signaling -- or earnest signaling -- expires.

Continuity in marketing metrics can also be important.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#82

Post by devalgo »

kapnobatairza wrote: post #69
devalgo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stefan Molyneux is a pig but your characterization of Damore is low effort and more or less completely wrong. If you read the memo it is a relatively straightforward review of standard Biology and Psychology research. There's virtually nothing controversial in it. If you have issues with it you have issues with science. Which given the "decolonize" science lunacy recently isn't surprising. China is laughing all the w…

"your characterization of Damore is low effort and more or less completely wrong". Your characterization of Damore is equally low effort. The memo is not simply a "relatively straightfoward review of standard Biology and Psychology research". Even if I were to agree that those parts of it were non-controversial, those parts of it are not the point or intention of the memo. You are completely ignoring the arguments Da…

>have been constructed to build a specific narrative about diversity and inclusion

Just for reference, the first line in the memo is literally: "I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes"

But you kapnobatairza, you actually know what was in Damore's heart better than he himself. You are an oracle and a prophet and the bringer of truth. 2+2=5 amirite.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#83

Post by equality_1138 »

ChomskyNormal4m wrote: post #66
equality_1138 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny? Unionizing in the advertising/tech industry to push a political agenda is acting like sheep! How does anyone get fooled into this kind of philosophy? Mob rules? Look at the big picture and think for yourself for a change.

It's funny how the managers, executives, board of directors, stockholders, business associations and their lobbyists all act together, pushing the political agenda - acting as a mob, as sheep - coming to a consensus - but we who are actually doing the work are lectured to isolate ourselves from one another, and not be a sheep who join a mob.

Excellent point but you're also advocating for a race to the bottom and us-versus-them mentality, which would certainly weaken your product. If anything we need greater attention to the employment-at-will legal standard in most industries, so that poor management can be dealt with effectively (if at all). Anyway it's hard to believe that widespread corruption could be rooted out by an uprising of young angry geeks :)

Is there actual literature on unionizing in software engineering, or is it mostly impassioned blog posts?

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#84

Post by munificent »

twic wrote: post #70
Miner49er wrote: post #11

Facebook seems to have a conservative bias. I've never used it myself though, so I can't completely say. I'm also not saying whether or not they should, but they seem to. Zuckerburg regularly hangs out with conservative political figures, but not liberal or letist ones. [0] They censor the left regularly [1]. Also, is there even any leftist publications in the FB news tab? They let the right slide by on things regula…

There was also this business about removing fact-checking of a bunk climate science article at the behest of a Republican congressman: https://heated.world/p/fact-check-of-viral-climate-misinform... My interpretation of this is not that Facebook has a conservative bias (what does it even mean for a company to have a bias?), but that Facebook's leaders are well aware that the company are extremely vulnerable to regula…

> My interpretation of this is not that Facebook has a conservative bias (what does it even mean for a company to have a bias?)

It would mean that the company's actions benefit members of one side of the political spectrum more than the other.

We're free to speculate about why a company's actions might do that and whether it's deliberate or an emergent consequence of some other intention, but I think it's fairly straightforward to define what bias would mean.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#85

Post by BTinfinity »

VerminOctopus1 wrote: post #78
BTinfinity wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baffled that you’re being downvoted; there’s plenty of arguments for and against those ideas. It’s difficult to come a consensus when the debates surrounding them increasingly turn to shouting matches, Internet rumours and “cancellation”

You're baffled that the person suggesting that creating a racially pure ethnostate is a reasonable idea worthy of discussion is being downvoted? Really? This was literally, not in any sense being hyperbolic, the goal of Hitler and the Nazis. What baffles me is how this talking point has apparently become normalized enough not to be immediately shouted down by every user on this website.

They've suggested that there's a variety of ideas that are no longer discussable for fear of being seen as hateful or evil. You've chosen just one of their many examples and immediately jumped to Nazism and Hitler, in doing so you're proving the parents point.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#86

Post by zo1 »

angst_ridden wrote: post #59
zo1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another aspect is that a lot of non-left, or right-leaning viewpoints have been categorized into "naughty idea" territory, despite a lot of reasonable people holding them. E.g. Things such as: Being against mass-migration from 3rd world countries to the west, wanting racially homogenous societies, removing welfare, building a wall, racial profiling, there being no gender pay-gap, protesting spreads the virus, BLM are…

Wanting racially homegeneous societies is an "evil idea" because to create one, you have to remove groups of people from a society based on their race.

I agree with you, people shouldn't be removed, ejected, forced to move, etc from a society based on their race or at all for any matter (though we kinda collectively agreed that that's okay for criminals? Separate discussion I guess.). What is evil is forcing people to do things against their will, period. But people wanting to be in groups similar to them isn't inherently evil, and I think we need to get past that in conversation. E.g. right now I would definitely prefer to be with people I share common nationality, interest, culture with.

I fear we're in dangerous territory where all such distinctions and nuance are lost in the shouting, essentially making us all "evil" in some way or another.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#87

Post by ergodicity001 »

save_ferris wrote: post #43
ergodicity001 wrote: post #31

I saw a video recently where someone was discussing Facebook's "moat". Essentially, among Big Tech, it has the least defensible moat, which I think is true. https://youtu.be/4SrxqfKn9Bw?t=1605 I think Facebook has very little choice right now. Libra could have been a moat, but it is more or less dead now. They are being cornered into being more pro-conservative, because otherwise their moat (engagement, which is what…

> because otherwise their moat (engagement, which is what advertisers pay for) will collapse by the time COVID is done. What makes you say this? I don’t quite follow.

I read that small businesses' ad spending account for over 90% of Facebook revenue.

If there is one thing you don't want to be right now, it is a small business owner fighting to bring employees back to work in an unsafe environment while operating at reduced capacity. What's the incentive for the employee to return to work? Jim Cramer said it well on CNBC when he asked how he can compete with the federal government to bring people back to work:

https://youtu.be/qG_Nq7kIojI?t=367

This is Jim Cramer we are talking about. He can probably even afford to overpay (and outbid the federal government) for a while to bring back his restaurant staff. Regular small businesses don't enjoy such advantages.

When these small businesses start rolling over one by one, there will just be a lot fewer small businesses left. And those who do survive will probably shrink their ad budgets.

I once heard a funny comment: Google shows you ads for stuff you know you want to buy. Facebook shows you ads for stuff you didn't know you want to buy (search intent of course). I would say search intent will drive ad spend for the foreseeable future. Plus, if it is a secular bear market for small businesses, ad rates on Google would also come down for those small businesses which do make it out alive at the end of COVID.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#88

Post by iagovar »

enumjorge wrote: post #80
iagovar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't a mysoginist memo, don't be so low effort. He isn't a scientist but he actually bring up stuff that was already being discussed when I studied sociology and AFAIK it's far from being settled.

Toward the beginning of the memo, Damore lists personality differences, on average, between men and women. The third item is that women have more “ Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance)”. I don’t know Damore so I can’t tell you whether he is a mysoginist or not, but he certainly uses arguments and language that mysogonists do. This is just one example of problematic areas of his memo. I realize there’s…

Trying to explain inequality or arguing about the performance of current practices are by no mean justification of anything.

Also, it's important to remember that he was fired. And this is central to the whole thing.

IDK, that may be viewed differently from the US, but from my pov it's clear that he was persecuted because of ideological reasons, painting Google as a reactionary organization.

And that's specially bad because Google is extremely powerful. Another stone in the bucket to mistrust Google.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#89

Post by vimy »

angst_ridden wrote: post #59
zo1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another aspect is that a lot of non-left, or right-leaning viewpoints have been categorized into "naughty idea" territory, despite a lot of reasonable people holding them. E.g. Things such as: Being against mass-migration from 3rd world countries to the west, wanting racially homogenous societies, removing welfare, building a wall, racial profiling, there being no gender pay-gap, protesting spreads the virus, BLM are…

Wanting racially homegeneous societies is an "evil idea" because to create one, you have to remove groups of people from a society based on their race.

Eastern Europe is still homogeneous and they are being vilified for wanting to keep it that way.

Re: Facebook fired an employee who posted evidence of preferential treatment

#90

Post by ardy42 »

MajorBee wrote: post #73
pb7 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my basic understanding is that Buzzfeed != Buzzfeed News. News is apparently a well run organization and it’s a shame that it uses the same brand for this very reason.

I'm sure they must have had a conversation on the trade-off of having a "known name" attached to their investigative journalism wing and that very "known name" causing them to be negatively associated with vacuous listicles. Maybe once Buzzfeed News becomes a brand strong enough to stand on its own it'll be spun off as a separate organization altogether.

IIRC, one of the reasons Buzzfeed News exists was to counter the negative associations with the Buzzfeed brand and its vacuous listicles.
Post reply on HN