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

Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 184 posts

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#151

Post by analog8374 »

xnorswap wrote: post #64
ramon156 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This makes me super uncomfortable. How do we opt out?" was the top-rated comment in response to the internal announcement, according to a post on Meta's internal workplace communications site seen by Business Insider." Have people lost their spine? seriously, quit your job. this is insane. why are americans putting up with this bullshit?

"Companies should be able to bully their staff, since their staff are free to quit" is not compatible with a decent society.

moderators should be free to censor users, since the users are free to leave the forum.

This appears to be a common philosophy. We all know it's foul, and then we cover up the smell with this thin justification and move on.

But ya, this seems to be commonly accepted already

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#152

Post by troupo »

RugnirViking wrote: post #147
troupo wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think expecting everyone else (which is, I believe, almost everyone working at facebook) not involved with any of these things to take a large personal sacrifice or be condemned is unlikely to result in many resignations. Ah yes. All those horrible things happened overnight, right? So that's why we don't expect people to take a large personal sacrifice of ... knowing about this shit for years, and still working f…

I think your position may feel good, but it will achieve nothing. It will probably not even convince anyone to resign, let alone actually stop bad things happening. So why be angry at people who did nothing wrong? Save it for those who actually did the stuff. Save it for lawsuits against the company. Save it for regulation. Save it for efforts to organize workers to push back against these things. A single person lea…

> So why be angry at people who did nothing wrong

"Oh no, I know everything about this company, so I actively chose to work for it and keep working for it while all this is happening. But I did nothing wrong. I only work here, making sure this company continues to work and exist".

> A single person leaving for moral reasons at this point will be replaced by the next guy.

So, out of thousands that keep working at Facebook, there will be just one person leaving? And you don't see it as a problem?

> They will not run out of guys.

Indeed. And you still don't see it as a problem and keep claiming that "but they did nothing wrong". They actively chose to work for this company. I can't make it more clear than it is.

In an ideal world more and more people leave and Facebook ends up scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find replacements. In this world tens of thousands of "we did nothing wrong" people have no qualms working on all of Facebook's systems and you keep pretending that they "did nothing wrong because it's the same as being born in a country or something".

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#153

Post by troupo »

snaking0776 wrote: post #91
RugnirViking wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said before. Its very easy to suggest that someone should leave their job on ideological grounds when its someone else you've never met. You have to understand, this hypothetical guy has never met zuck. He's quite possibly never met anyone who has never met zuck. He may well not live in america. The job market for programmers is not good right now. Estimates put average time in unemployment at 12+ months. Would…

I think you’re treating the people at these companies as more dumb/powerless than they really are. I used to work in big tech and quit after a few years due to similar concerns that are being raised here. I will tell you anecdotally that everyone there I worked with thought our company was a net negative on society and that our work was at best indifferent and in my case likely exploited weak labor laws in poor count…

> I used to work in big tech and quit after a few years due to similar concerns that are being raised here.

This also reminded of a personal anecdote:

I had a colleague who was fresh out of college. He disagreed with whatever our company was doing at the time, but he said "at this point, fresh out of college, this ended up being the only company that hired me. I'm here for my CV only". The moment he could find a job elsewhere, he quit.

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#155

Post by salawat »

ohyoutravel wrote: post #42
RugnirViking wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my arguments above already respond to the substance of what you have written, you haven't adressed them, merely restated the position I objected to at the start. I'm no debate lord, merely expressed my dislike of the baying for blood people clearly have here, pointed at everyone seemingly except the actual people responsible

I’ve been seeing this sort of response more and more lately. :(

You will. Especially as it becomes more and more uncomfortable for people as they are forced to try to rationalize away their part in all of this. Don't think of it necessarily as a cop-out, but a sign that the person at least has either A) working empathy circuits and isn't likely the sort to focus on, or B) has at least started to see the tide is changing and has had to recalibrate their stance formerly accommodating a I-can-callous-about-this-without-consequence viewpoint, and is now taking on shades of "Oh, I actually kind of have to be concerned about effects on other people or it may blow back on me." Either way, the effort isn't wasted. The social dynamic still shifts, even if it's for pointedly unideal reasons. Note it, and move on.

The aim is change for the better. If people are talking about it, even in a deescalatory manner, that still means the trajectory is moving. Don't lose heart. Keep your conviction hot, tight, and focused.

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#157

Post by jredwards »

mc32 wrote: post #50
ramon156 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This makes me super uncomfortable. How do we opt out?" was the top-rated comment in response to the internal announcement, according to a post on Meta's internal workplace communications site seen by Business Insider." Have people lost their spine? seriously, quit your job. this is insane. why are americans putting up with this bullshit?

Exactly. It’s the same defeatist attitude people who get an extra three months of pay to train their Eastern European or Indian replacements. They will gladly take the three months pay to train a replacement. I’d quit on the spot. Let them figure it out.

Practically speaking, the person who stays has three months salary, plus severance and then unemployment. The person who quits loses their entire income stream immediately.

Do you think your small act of defiance has a bigger impact on you, or on the company? Now imagine you have a family at home that depends on your income and do the math again.

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#158

Post by dogleash »

cannonpr wrote: post #96
rdevilla wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right on. Meta employees, fuck you for building the surveillance state we live in today. You are the fucking scourge and death of the 2000s internet. Eat shit, I care not for your "privacy concerns."

While I can understand the sentiment, it should be expressed with less vulgarity, and frankly, workers should show more solidarity to one another, not because of “deserving it” or not, but simply because it’s the only way out of the pit they put us in. Otherwise we are forever dragging each other back in.

>Otherwise we are forever dragging each other back in.

I think turning a blind eye to our colleagues' work as if it's morally neutral is what keeps us in that pit.

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#159

Post by dgellow »

RugnirViking wrote: post #8
dgellow wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dave working at meta is indeed in part responsible for meta doings. Yes leaving has a cost. That’s the whole point. Meta actions also have associated costs, it is just externalized and doesn’t impact Dave directly

As I said before. Its very easy to suggest that someone should leave their job on ideological grounds when its someone else you've never met. You have to understand, this hypothetical guy has never met zuck. He's quite possibly never met anyone who has never met zuck. He may well not live in america. The job market for programmers is not good right now. Estimates put average time in unemployment at 12+ months. Would…

> As I said before. Its very easy to suggest that someone should leave their job on ideological grounds when its someone else you've never met.

Happy so say the exact same thing to their face for what it’s worth. There isn’t anything complicated here, if you choose to work for a company known for doing bad things you’re obviously taking part of the responsibility.

If people aren’t willing to leave when things are still very comfortable for them, because they might have to accept a lower salary for not working for EvilCorp, that sets a pretty bad precedent for leaving when things are even worse. You can rationalize, but that doesn’t remove the responsibility

Re: Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance software on work PCs

#160

Post by dgellow »

csoups14 wrote: post #10
dgellow wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dave working at meta is indeed in part responsible for meta doings. Yes leaving has a cost. That’s the whole point. Meta actions also have associated costs, it is just externalized and doesn’t impact Dave directly

We should focus on effective means for change. Focusing external influence on low-level individuals with no decision making power might feel good but it has accomplished a sum total of nothing in the past. Why would we think it will make the situation better this time? They swap people in and out of projects all the time and it's really not disruptive at all. The only ways these tech behemoths have made any meaningfu…

Not working for a company known for doing bad things at a global scale is an extremely low bar
Post reply on HN