Just in: [Company Name] doesn't care about you: [Company name] always chooses profits over people
All companies choose people. The people they choose may not be you, however.
Facebook chooses profits over people
141–150 of 253 posts
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#142My reaction to this headline is, if you want someone to care about you, call your mother. Most of the world doesn't care about you, and it's not a scandal, it's just how reality works. The whole problem with Facebook is that we somehow ever trusted that it was not motivated by profit, and shared the most intimate details of our lives with it. Stupid fucks, us.
I’m not sure if your language was intentional but this was literally Mark’s attitude from day one. [1] 1. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indiatoday.in/amp/technolog...
This article that you are sharing is the dumbest thing I have read today.
It literally says: "the company has built a culture where privacy and user data aren't all that important."
It's Facebook, the whole point is no privacy and the entire product is user data, what do you mean "aren't that important"???
It's like going to the street naked and complaining that someone took pictures of you.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well as long as it's technically not hoarding, problem solved! Nobody is hungry anymore :) Come on mate you know what we mean.. I'm not even calling to get shot of billionaires, I just want them to pay their damn taxes
> Come on mate you know what we mean I know what you mean, and I agree with you. But OP was literally calling for a wealth cap [1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28956273
A wealth cap why is this looked at as such a bad thing, your body has caps, the environment has caps, earth has a cap on how much it could handle. But na don't touch money or cap that, as that would not be fair instead allow it to keep going uncheck and spinning out of control we will fix it when it's no longer a situation we can live or exisit in. Is that a better option? Just let it explode and blame something else
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#144>The documents I have provided to Congress prove that Facebook has repeatedly misled the public about what its own research reveals about the safety of children, the efficacy of its artificial intelligence systems, and its role in spreading divisive and extreme messages.
Here's the red flag: for the children. Anytime that is brought up, it's something bad for the population. See drug war, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria (Aleppo), vape pressure (to keep people smoking cigarettes for state settlement money), etc.
I'm afraid the ultimate plan is to get rid of section 230, which would of course give a monopoly of political discourse back to the corporations: Viacom News, Comcast News, Fox News, Warner News, Microsoft News. Of course controlling that is a lot of power and allows business as usual in our governments with little to no pushback.
https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/dear-congress-platform...
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#145These headlines naïvely miss the point. The problem isn’t Facebook, a private company, seeking profits. The problem is its deeply-entrenched psychopathy and pathological record of lying [1]. And it really appears to be a Facebook problem. Instagram for Kids wasn’t the fever dream of a deranged Instagrammer. It was pushed by a Facebook implant [2]. I don’t know if being in proximity to Facebook’s leadership corrupts p…
I would even say it's simpler, and the problem is Mark Zuckerberg specifically. He's deeply immoral, and continues to do what Facebook does for power and money. I understand, on some level, the excitement - he's a computer nerd who came to control an organization that is more powerful than the majority of the world's countries. Zuckerberg controls the platform that is the primary means of communication for hundreds o…
That's a bit far fetched. Comparing Zuckerberg to dictators and slave traders? He could be on HN.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#146These headlines naïvely miss the point. The problem isn’t Facebook, a private company, seeking profits. The problem is its deeply-entrenched psychopathy and pathological record of lying [1]. And it really appears to be a Facebook problem. Instagram for Kids wasn’t the fever dream of a deranged Instagrammer. It was pushed by a Facebook implant [2]. I don’t know if being in proximity to Facebook’s leadership corrupts p…
> And it really appears to be a Facebook problem. Instagram for Kids wasn’t the fever dream of a deranged Instagrammer
Two things to unpack here.
its not a facebook problem. its a problem that exists in many large companies. Apple for example doesn't give a shit about individuals. (you can see that if you slip off any of the predefined support pathways)
_everyone_ to google is just a thing to evaluated and advertised to. They are literally storing your every move and using to sell adverts, services and the like (how do you think they manage the "x is busy now, try later"?)
TikTok has literally hoovered up most of the 9-18 year olds, they even say as much when they try and pitch to advertisers. its the wild west on there, with all sorts of nasties flying around
Snapchat's USP is nudes & bullying, regardless of age.
Amazon: knowingly hawks fakes, dangerous and poor quality products, shamelessly copies and undercuts producers. But they have "free deliveries" and free returns, so its all ok.
There is nothing unusual about facebook, its just nobody likes them, and its fashionable to not like them.
Now to the point: instagram for kids. A fucking stupid idea. There was no possible way it could end good, even if it was perfect.
I imagine the thought process was: the kids are flocking to tiktok, we need them on facebook's platform. We are able to protect them better than snap/tiktok/other because we (facebook) have better controls than the rest. We also have some of them on instagram already, its better to make something for them, rather than having them there illicitly.
that isn't evil, its just hopelessly naive.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any company its only purpose is profit. This isn't true for any company, not even investment banks. When people start companies, money is seldom a major reason, and as they grow they get a life of their own. Even large companies are run by people, people with feelings, insecurities, ambitions. An incredibly wealthy leader of a large corporation is not really motivated by money, he wants more status, he want to look…
Of course they do. That leader would get the boot ASAP if he chooses any goal other than making money as he is behest to investors who expect a maximized return to their investment. Companies where your scenario can play out are the exception and not the rule. Not that the motivations you wrote are much better for society. I am speaking here about large companies that can have impact on a societal level, not your sma…
It's hard for investors to get Management in line of the needs of the investors, they mostly work for their own needs, take a look at the big bonuses and raises they constantly give themselves. Often even after a terrible year.
In big corporations there are so many investors that they are hardly organized. And even if they are it's a difficult problem to incentivize a manager correctly. It's a topic with a lot economical scientific research. In theoretical terms it's called the principle-agent problem.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#148These headlines naïvely miss the point. The problem isn’t Facebook, a private company, seeking profits. The problem is its deeply-entrenched psychopathy and pathological record of lying [1]. And it really appears to be a Facebook problem. Instagram for Kids wasn’t the fever dream of a deranged Instagrammer. It was pushed by a Facebook implant [2]. I don’t know if being in proximity to Facebook’s leadership corrupts p…
> I don’t know if being in proximity to Facebook’s leadership corrupts people. I guess you need to be a bad person from the get-go to be able to keep a smiling face in that place. I mean, it is not even that Facebook employees are forced be necessity to work there. They have plenty of options. It is just that honest work, like say a weapon manufacturer, pays so much less than ratting out your friends and family to Zu…
I have found when it comes to career, or money, 95% plus shelve their morality. (I'm suprised Paul Graham hasen't wrote one of his infamous essays on the subject. He must have seen a lot in his times.)
Be it a Psychiatrist, Chiropractor, Attorney, Priest, entrepreneur, or tech worker, they are all the same with morality.
If it affects Their Financial Security, or Financial Future--They Become Sheep. (sorry about the caps.)
When I was younger I walked out of a Chiropractic school. I knew the crux of the profession, the Subluxation, was very rare, and if people got better through manipulation of bones---it was all placebo. I was alwready in debt for 10 grand, and had a A- average.
I used to think how can all these people sit through this, and not question the profession.
I'm no hero though.
I dropped out because I developd a huge anxiety disorder, and had some kind of breakdown.
If my mind was stronger, I probally would have graduated, and hung up a shingle and go into denial over my worthiness. (I would have never done a Rotary on even my worst enemy.)
My point is many people like to belive they have morals. I sometimes think the only people left with true morality might be the Amish.
Sure people like to believe they have string convictions, and ethics; but when it comes to financial security they are followers. They might disagree internally, but really taking a stand is very rare.
You would think a wealthy man who could afford to be moral, and ethical, would take advantage of their privileged situation?
No----they are the worst offenders.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#149“People’s World, Continuing The Daily Worker”. I never thought I would see a Marxist newspaper at the top of Hacker News: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_World
At least Marxists by definition have been at it longer than anyone else when it comes to criticising capitalism.
Re: Facebook chooses profits over people
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would even say it's simpler, and the problem is Mark Zuckerberg specifically. He's deeply immoral, and continues to do what Facebook does for power and money. I understand, on some level, the excitement - he's a computer nerd who came to control an organization that is more powerful than the majority of the world's countries. Zuckerberg controls the platform that is the primary means of communication for hundreds o…
That's a bit far fetched. Comparing Zuckerberg to dictators and slave traders? He could be on HN.
And? Are you worried he might be sad?