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

Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 320 posts

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#271

Post by KaiserPro »

marksbrown wrote: post #223
KaiserPro wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then betraying those promises to prop up the regime I mean thats one way to look at it. Another way was, the lib dems traded everything for the chance to change the voting from FPP to proportional representation, and failed. Yes, he went back on tuition fees, and worse still wasn't able to make it a graduate tax (hence the stupid loan system) but the gamble was that, and it was clear at the time. unlucky for the li…

Alternative Vote is not Proportional Representation. And to be very clear, liberal democrat MPs, including Nick Clegg, were photographed with signed papers saying that if they were ever in government they would abolish tuition fees. A cynical ploy to win university constituencies. That said, the country was reeling from the 2008 banking crisis, that even with a competent PM in Brown (despite his 'ignorant woman') com…

> And to be very clear, liberal democrat MPs, including Nick Clegg, were photographed with signed papers saying that if they were ever in government they would abolish tuition fees.

I am well aware, I was in a libdem constituency as they made those promises in the early part of the 2000s. I think its even in one of the uni newspapers.

But the issue is this, government is about compromises. The libdems compromised to get in power. They had a "contract" that allowed for certain policies to be put forward in exchange for other policies by the tories. They thought, nievely that they could contain the worst parts of the osbourne/cameron system in exchange for long term voting reform.

It was a gamble that failed, and they were roundly punished for it.

The problem for us is that labour imploded, which left us with no effective opposition the post libdem years.

Its all very well to say "its a cynical ploy" but given that coalitions outside of war are never a thing in UK politics, its hard to see how the libdems planned it.

I can understand that you are angry about tuition fees. the unforgivable bit was the loan system rather than a graduate tax. Its regressive, it was known to be regressive at the time. But the tories wanted a loan and thus, here we are.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#272

Post by pirates »

rustystump wrote: post #120
kylecazar wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This applies to Elon's incredibly strange video game cheating scandal too. It's pathetic and weird.

That was i think the most revealing thing about his character bar none because of how mundane it all was. Anyone with a tiny bit of video game background called that out from miles away. It was so pathetic. Richest dude in world with spaceship company. Has nothing to prove. Cheats, lies, and gaslights when caught. Has to be “number one” at a video game that has virtually zero skill where rank is almost entirely who g…

The mask was off way way before this imo but I think you’re right that inanity of it is telling in a lot of ways.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#273

Post by nerdyadventurer »

akudha wrote: post #37

My guess would be - there is way more primitive explanation than setting an example etc (which is also a good reason, from their point of view). It is just plain ego and pettiness - we see it everywhere, even from a manager who has 3 people reporting to him. Why else would Zuck cheat on a board game , of all things? That too in private? It might just be as primitive as "I have more money than God, therefore I am bett…

Actually this is not specific to rich or US, this is behavior in most of western countries. This started with colonialism, where one consider superior than others in every aspect, so they can do whatever they please. Many are still blinded by this ego, which is the reason for current geopolitical stability. We should understand that sometimes we are the problem. Simon Sinek have great talk with historical example on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWEI9FDf-0g

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#274

Post by mlrtime »

menloshark wrote: post #258
Anon1096 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because you pretty quickly catch downvotes from people with sour grapes whenever you talk good about working at big tech. Quadruply so for companies much more hated than average like Palantir/Meta/Oracle. It's just what echo chamber downvoting culture gives you it doesn't really have to do with what's happening internally. They're very very happy to spill beans and talk about the current environment on Blind w…

> They're very very happy to spill beans and talk about the current environment on Blind which is a lot less hostile. This is funny, Blind is even more negative on the general company sentiment than this place. People are saying the current morale right now is the worst it's ever been.

Right, but you don't get downvoted to [deleted] when you speak against the hive mind. Some people are genuinely happy working at these places.

I've worked in Big Tech and I know for sure the team you're on makes a big difference, regardless of the CEO.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#275

Post by mlrtime »

andsoitis wrote: post #108
stephc_int13 wrote: post #104

It is the same reasoning as with the regular Decimation. It is all about disciplining their employees. And it works. We're not saying many ex or current Meta employees talking about their experiences here, even if I am sure that HN is pretty popular among this crowd. And of course this is not unique to Zuck/Meta. We don't hear much from people working for Musk either.

Could it be that people actually like their work there?

Your text is gray, is this irony or proving the point?

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#276

Post by simianparrot »

jordanb wrote: post #101
dahart wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is just plain ago and pettiness […] Why else would Zuck cheat on a board game Recently I felt somewhat enlightened on this point, specifically in regards to Trump cheating at golf and some of his bald-faced lies, but I’d speculate it applies here too. Others pointed out to me that while it might look petty and ridiculous to normal people, it’s a social power move to get away with things, and serves the purpose o…

This is called "Fuckery:" I tell you a lie. You know it's a lie. I know you know it's a lie. But you have to pretend that you believe it because of the power I have over you. The Fuckery is a demonstration of that power.

Like how the government operated during covid.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#277

Post by JumpCrisscross »

microgpt wrote: post #268
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is a guillotine somewhere else is good. Guillotines at home don’t particularly hurt the rich as a class. (It’s debated whether France’s elite actually consolidated wealth and power through its revolutions.)

Healthcare denials plummeted for a few months after that CEO died

> Healthcare denials plummeted for a few months after that CEO died

Source? I’ve seen this claim, but it doesn’t appear in any aggregate statistics from what I can tell.

Also, middle manager with a “CEO” title. The billionaire who owns the group is fine.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#278

Post by ElProlactin »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #184
dahart wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is just plain ago and pettiness […] Why else would Zuck cheat on a board game Recently I felt somewhat enlightened on this point, specifically in regards to Trump cheating at golf and some of his bald-faced lies, but I’d speculate it applies here too. Others pointed out to me that while it might look petty and ridiculous to normal people, it’s a social power move to get away with things, and serves the purpose o…

I doubt it's as calculated as that. Trump literally has no concept of truth, so he doesn't lie for strategic reasons. He says whatever makes him feel best about himself moment to moment. This is textbook narcissism - confusing to those who expect some kind of object constancy who can't deliver it, but predictable from the syndrome. He also intimidates and threatens more directly, but that doesn't get reported on the…

> Zuckerberg seems similarly fragile, but in a less overt way.

Give him time. He's only 42. Trump at 42 had more "charm"/"charisma" in his pinky finger than Zuck has in his entire being.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#279

Post by voakbasda »

SoftTalker wrote: post #85
akudha wrote: post #37

My guess would be - there is way more primitive explanation than setting an example etc (which is also a good reason, from their point of view). It is just plain ego and pettiness - we see it everywhere, even from a manager who has 3 people reporting to him. Why else would Zuck cheat on a board game , of all things? That too in private? It might just be as primitive as "I have more money than God, therefore I am bett…

Hallmarks of a sociopath. Trying to rationalize what he does in terms of normal ethics and motivations is a fool's errand.

This sums it up. I can’t understand how people think these people are anything but the world’s worst sociopaths. I cannot understand how so many people idolize and buy into them.

Re: Zuckerberg's war on whistleblowers

#280

Post by voakbasda »

cataphract wrote: post #239
neilv wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article's theory is similar: > But I think they've decided that this is a price worth paying, because: [...] c) By destroying Sarah Wynn-Williams, they can terrorize all those thousands of bitter ex-employees into silence about the even graver sins the company has committed.

Surely if it was that bad someone would reveal it anonymously to the press.

Ever signed a severance agreement?
Post reply on HN