Almost finished with it after few days. I think it is must read and the fact author testified adds more reasons.
Glad to see this on HN.
Careless People
431–440 of 575 posts
Re: Careless People
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can anyone benefit from working 10% harder or smarter? Undoubtedly. But success isn’t linear. It’s clear from the zeitgeist that the ultra-rich and powerful—past or present—aren’t working a million percent harder or smarter; their positions are more accurately explained by structural advantages. The first million might be 95% hard work and talent. The next million, probably a bit less so.
> It’s clear from the zeitgeist that the ultra-rich and powerful—past or present—aren’t working a million percent harder or smarter; their positions are more accurately explained by structural advantages. Millions of people had an equal or better starting condition than Mark Zuckerberg so we aren't really lacking privileged people, but vanishingly few of those do become ultra wealthy.
It’s not just about starting condition but also the level of psychotic desire to profit at any cost.
Re: Careless People
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does anyone actually believe > I firmly believe that it's positive for both. Alright, setup an experiment and prove it. Should be easy. Speculation is free. Can't ever be wrong in the land of uncertainty.
Yes, it's totally sensible that someone would setup an experiment to prove a conjecture in a comment thread that will be forgotten in a couple hours. Totally reasonable ask.
Guess there's nothing we can do then. Beliefs are all that matter.
Re: Careless People
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's called the Streisand Effect. :)
It's kind of amazing that people still hit this, really. Like, if you're Facebook's lawyers, how are you not telling them "don't talk about this; anything you say or do will only promote it further"? The lawyers must _know_.
The lawyers and the PR team don’t talk to each other.
Re: Careless People
#435I’m only part of the way through the book, so have nothing to spoil here. But it’s entertaining. And shocking. The author will relate a scene that’s so absurd that you think “ah, this can’t be true, this is made up for dramatic effect, nobody would act like that” and then you Google it and you realize the absurd thing is totally true and was fully documented at the time. All the author is adding is a perspective from…
Did you find the author/narrator very unlikable? [mild spoilers ahead] I was tempted to stop reading after the shark attack story when she wakes up in the hospital and declares "I saved myself". Ugh. But I think it makes narrative sense: why would a good person stay at the company after all she has witnessed? It also makes the company leaders seem so much worse in comparison. One more thing: Is it credible that she h…
> why would a good person stay at the company after all she has witnessed?
Wait, is the angle of the book that she’s a good person? That can’t possibly be right… it’s a book about all the horrible things she tried to help Facebook do.
The title of the book doesn’t suggest she was disappointed in their morals. It suggests she was disappointed in their ability to do their jobs.
Re: Careless People
#436Re: Careless People
#437It’s jarring when people refer to having read something and then it turns out they listened to the audiobook. This is not a jab on this specific blogger but a general thing. There should be a term for listening to an audiobook that’s not reading but does refer to a book on audio level, or just say you listened to the book.
What's wrong with "listening" as that term?
Re: Careless People
#438It's nice to know that despite playing fast and loose with the facts, the film The Social Network does capture something fundamentally true about Zuckerberg's psychology. The pathological need to dominate can be disguised when you're the underdog, but the more power you accrue the more it becomes the sole motivation. To paraphrase Robert Caro, "power does not corrupt, it reveals."
David Brin has it as “absolute power attracts the absolutely corruptible.”
Re: Careless People
#439I read the book. It’s a very interesting read. A few things stood out ( no spoilers ) - Casual indifference at exec level to atrocities happening because of FB/ Meta. - Money/power does make you insensitive - Tech bro view of the world permeates most decisions that Meta takes. - Casual sexual harassment for women ( follows from the tech bro worldview I guess ) - US centric world view influencing how execs treat world…
I don’t think I ever connected that “Lean In” was from a C-suite member of Facebook and I certainly didn’t know how morally bankrupt it was. The case is made pretty well in the book that Sheryl does not practice what she preaches.