Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#311

Post by lkrubner » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:03 PM UTC

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

The increasing deluge of articles on the theme "Instagram is hurting the mental health of teen girls" has the potential to evolve into the kind of widespread moral panic among parents that destroyed MySpace back in 2006-2008.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#312

Post by JasonFruit » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:04 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #119

Bhilai wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glenn Greenwood in my opinion is not a neutral party here. In recent times he clearly has chosen sides.

One fundamental precept of rational thought is that arguments speak for themselves. Claims exist independently of their speakers. You can't rebut an argument by suggesting that the person who made the argument has "chosen sides" or has any other characteristic whatsoever. You have to address the content of the argument itself. The human is irrelevant. Everyone should read Greenwald's article. He makes a good case.

I can't imagine that the people downvoting this comment would do so if they saw it in a politically neutral context. It's completely uncontroversial in what it said: arguments can be evaluated without regard to who is making them. This is middle-school citizenship class stuff.

We really are blinded by our politics these days.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#313

Post by tokoaso » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

They dont matter. What matters in a hyper competitive tech world, is whether you can sustain a level of quality in hiring. There are so many other options for smart people who dont want to deal with the drama.

FB has definately taken a reputational hit that will effect that quality. Which will effect the solutions they come up with. And given the list of issues they have to deal with, they will stay in the news for all the wrong things for a long time to come.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#314

Post by svachalek » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #157

SamBam wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was also interested to know what "double-digit premium" actually means in this context. I feel like the order of magnitude are confusing to me. Like, they pay people $10-$99 more, or they pay people 10x-99x more? Neither seems a plausible interpretation of the statement. Edit: Ok, ok, percentage!

I assumed a 1.zy multiplier vs a 1.0y multiplier (where y,z are decimal digits) Anyway, I'm not convinced that's causal. Doesn't FB have a reputation for paying well to get smart people, and don't many people aspire to work there so they can get paid well? I personally don't believe I would ever work for facebook because of how uninterested / opposed I am to their mission. But I don't see any evidence, including lots…

They were always one of the most picky and high paying employers out there, but anecdotal reports from friends say their offers now are truly stratospheric and even other FAANGs don't want to compete on a compensation basis.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#315

Post by dresdenfire » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

eigengrau5150 wrote: post #293

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

> And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They don't have to care. They just shouldn't be surprised if I refuse to hire them because I was able to find them on Facebook/Instagram. Likewise, if they worked for Facebook I won't hire them. They're tainted. LOL

Wow, you basically doing hate speech for FB engineers on a social site and calling FB bad. Pot calling kettle black?

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#316

Post by dresdenfire » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:11 PM UTC

metalliqaz wrote: post #39

shoto_io wrote: post #3

No. That’s what people like us and all the main stream media hope for. But: most people I know don’t have the slightest clue that Insta and WhatsApp belong to the FB group. And even worse: most of them don’t give a shit about the reputation of FB. They just want to send messages and share pictures through those apps.

My question is... why do people like us continue to work there? They know what is going on there more than anyone.

Because they see that external perception doesn't match what is happening internally.

Interesting thing is we have both left and right aligned that FB is bad but if you ask them why they are bad, they would not agree on a single thing.

This is why nothing is going to be done and it's all a cycle which will keep repeating itself.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#317

Post by JohnBooty » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:12 PM UTC

wayoutthere wrote: post #292

JohnBooty wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users would need an order of magnitude superior alternative, and most critically, users would need to move en mass. Yeah. Network effect. Arguably nothing on Earth has ever had such a powerful network effect as Facebook. I dislike FB for all of the usual reasons, plus a few of my own. But I still have an FB account. I don't check it very often, and I've got notifications turned off. But ditching my FB account entirel…

> But ditching my FB account entirely means I'd lose access to dozens of people I wouldn't have a great way of contacting otherwise. That used to be a fear of mine, but after deleting my account I’ve found it to be a core feature. It forces me to be intentional with my relationships; if I want to stay in touch with someone I have to make the effort. Otherwise, the relationship is likely more parasocial than actively…

That sounds like a healthy place to be -- congrats on achieving that.

I've largely achieved that as well, I think. Slightly different road traveled, perhaps. I have a larger than average extended family: a dozen aunts/uncles and a corresponding number of cousins. It's impossible to have a close relationship with all of them, but I do enjoy keeping up with how they're doing and knowing when big life events (and deaths) happen.

So, my day-to-day life has absolutely nothing to do with FB. I've got notifications off and I typically feel no desire to check it. Instead I'm focused on my much smaller number of intentional, meaningful relationships. But, from time to time I do enjoy scrolling through FB and seeing how so-and-so is doing.

Do you have an extended family you keep in touch with? Do you keep up with them through other means, or have you just sort of let them fade from your life?

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#318

Post by jszymborski » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

enkid wrote: post #276

jszymborski wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on the outside looking in, (and this might be an unpopular opinion in this crowd) but that's the reputation of tech in Silicon Valley, no? The mentality is often "we'll be too small to prosecute until we're too big". That's how you end up with these seemingly superlegal entities like Uber, Google, hell even Crunchyroll. Theranos was the peak example of how tech companies are encouraged to misrepresent fact to bot…

Not saying you're right it wrong, bit Theranos seems like a counter example to what you are arguing.

I suppose what I meant here was that Theranos was so successful at misrepresenting facts to industry and the consumer that they were able to reach meteoric heights based on absolutely nothing at all. It's in that way that I mean that Theranos exemplified dishonesty in SV tech.

Of course, unlike Uber/Google/Crunchy, Theranos was breaking the law in the service of a product that not only didn't existed, but couldn't. That meant the company had to eventually implode, but its entire existence was fueled by the same sort of dishonesty SV startups have (fairly or no) gained a reputation for.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#319

Post by rafale » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

ferdowsi wrote: post #302

rafale wrote: post #297

Microsoft used to have a worst reputation when they were on the top of the world, undisputed ans ruthless. Look at them. A darling.

Microsoft did have a bad reputation, but primarily as a bad corporate player. They didn't have a reputation as a company that values profit over tearing apart civil societies.

True. The problems with Microsoft never got politicized to this level. But that's perhaps a sign of the times.

Re: Facebook is nearing a reputational point of no return

#320

Post by dresdenfire » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

erostrate wrote: post #25

The articles ends with a suggestion that Mark Zuckerberg should be fired from his CEO role, but he controls 58% of the voting shares, so I'm not sure who this appeal is directed at.

Ofcourse, the only right course of action would be for Mark to fire himself!