Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
naildrivin5.com
Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
1–10 of 173 posts
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#2I've had similar feelings about working for financial services industries - all of their main revenue sources don't actually make anyone's life any better, other than in some tangential way that is secondary to the enrichment of the company.
That said, most internet companies do deliver some modicum of usefulness to their users, as a byproduct of selling their eyeballs to advertisers (which is the actual product).
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#3Applications like those provided by Google, Twitter and Facebook only achieve their popularity based on their widespread use, thus the need to keep them free and supported by advertising. Just like television, radio, the heavily-subsidized news industry and many, many more programs that rely on sponsorships in lieu of publicly-funded grants. These programs create jobs and in many cases promote education and health awareness through outreach, not to mention life-saving services and charities who without the use of advertising would not be able to sustain themselves. Advertising is a fact of life and has been socially pervasive since times immemorial. Advertising is communication and vice versa. Without it we would not be able to function as a society.
* that tv license they have in the UK is whack.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#4Also why he'll never be a journalist, magazine columnist, or work on a TV show.
Advertising is just a "bug" in the system that a lot of companies are exploiting: it turns out you can make a lot of money by doing nearly nothing. Eventually the advertising revenue will dry up because people will become immune to it (or just smarter), and everyone will figure out some new way to monetize their services, perhaps by charging money to use them.
If you want advertising to go away, support these companies. The more ads people see, the less they'll click. And then the whole system blows up.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#5Applications like those provided by Google, Twitter and Facebook only achieve their popularity based on their widespread use, thus the need to keep them free and supported by advertising. Just like television, radio, the heavily-subsidized news industry and many, many more programs that rely on sponsorships in lieu of publicly-funded grants. These programs create jobs and in many cases promote education and health aw…
that tv license they have in the UK is whack
From over here in the United States, it looks like it's not such a terrible thing. The BBC manages to produce great programming and content, and the license is much less than what the typical US consumer pays for cable.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#6This is was really "interesting". To summarize it: I will never work for Google, Facebook or Twitter, because they want to make profit. Jeez...these are not ONG's or some sort of humanitarian enterprises! How does he think that these companies pay developer salaries? And saying that all of those companies are focused in platforms for advertisement is clearly an understatement. I never cared too much for the add's that Facebook has and neither was offended by them. It's all business at the end of the day and a legit way of making money.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#7Also why he'll never be a journalist, magazine columnist, or work on a TV show. Advertising is just a "bug" in the system that a lot of companies are exploiting: it turns out you can make a lot of money by doing nearly nothing. Eventually the advertising revenue will dry up because people will become immune to it (or just smarter), and everyone will figure out some new way to monetize their services, perhaps by charg…
Advertising is a bug in the human brain. It turns out dropping names, unfounded associations, and weak arguments is enough to get people to buy things. As long as we're easily swayed to spend money like that, advertising will stick around.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#8I happen to work for Facebook, and a large fraction of my friends and family are expatriates. A place to easily keep in touch, share photos of kids, chat with abuelita, all that boring stuff, directly improves our quality of life.
When I recommend Linux for my friends, the top two "programs" they care about are Skype and Facebook. After that, maybe Youtube.
As for the ads, yes, that's a source of revenue. If that is a dealbreaker for author, well, I had that opinion once myself. Then I graduated high school and worked for a very interesting advertising startup, learned about the origins and practice of it and how it grew up alongside print, took advantage of and sped up the development of new technologies, etc. I don't expect to convince anyone but advertising is itself a worthwhile problem.
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#9Also why he'll never be a journalist, magazine columnist, or work on a TV show. Advertising is just a "bug" in the system that a lot of companies are exploiting: it turns out you can make a lot of money by doing nearly nothing. Eventually the advertising revenue will dry up because people will become immune to it (or just smarter), and everyone will figure out some new way to monetize their services, perhaps by charg…
"The more ads people see, the less they'll click. And then the whole system blows up."
Do you really think so? Read up on priming ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(psychology) ) and tell me if you still think so.
Advertising works. Even if NO ONE CLICKS, it still works (brand advertising is still the lion's share of advertising spending in the world).
Re: Why I'd never work for Google, Twitter, or Facebook
#10It's true, but quite reductive, that that these smart people are working on these interesting projects in the service of advertising. If you think in these terms, Walter Cronkite worked for ads, too.
Also, consider that to the extent that these projects are open-sourced or otherwise widely available, they create external value. Go will not be solely used by Google, though it may have been created to serve Google's aims. Likewise for whatever messaging system Twitter built this week.