
I'm resigning from my job at Facebook - dredmorbius
https://www.facebook.com/timothy.j.aveni/posts/3006224359465567
======
mtmail
250 comments in
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23394671](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23394671)

~~~
dredmorbius
Hrm, yes, though flagged.

(I'd searched the FB link, didn't see the LinkedIn post.)

~~~
jacobzoo
Why was it flagged?

~~~
rodiger
Flags are generally from user votes- so probably too inflammatory/political to
some here.

Per the guidelines: "Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or
sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of
pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV
news, it's probably off-topic."

------
mchusma
I don't understand why doesn't Facebook just: -Allow all posts -Allow users to
customize what they want to see (e.g. "dont show me posts that glorify
violence" or "only allow covid posts that match WHO guidelines" or "allow
exceptions from political figures or of historical significance") and allow
users to ban hide posts that are found untruthful by third parties (snopes,
etc).

To me effectively everyone wins. Facebook users who want to curate their
experience can do so. Facebook gets out of the censorship business so
governments can lay off. Governments will have a hard time objecting because
it is the users controlling their information, not the company. "Sources of
truth" have to compete to get the customer's business.

Its hard but not that hard, and its Facebook's core business.

~~~
at_a_remove
Ah, that word "just." Whenever I see "just" in some kind of kind of technical
demand in the first line, I immediately know that there's a lot of stuff to
unpack.

Here, you have requested something fairly close to a general AI which
understands both written language, images, and even more fun, images of
language. Cartoon violence right on down to "Will no one rid me of this
turbulent priest?" And will quoting Henry II of England set off your detector?

Let's unpack your COVID post thing -- note that WHO guidelines have changed a
few times. Recall that era wherein they said that there was no evidence of
human-to-human transmission. Also, don't buy masks. So you'd have to factor in
a time domain as the guidelines change, in addition to your generalized AI as
above.

In IT, I have frequently heard requests for "why can't we just get the things
we know we will like?" and such. It all boils down to that mind-reading,
future-predicting generalized AI.

Why don't we just turn it on?

~~~
banads
Okay, but companies like Google, FB, and Twitter are already putting great
efforts towards implementing that type of thing in production.

Whats so difficult about letting a user toggle those existing filters on and
off? Or allowing users more control over their news feed, such as allowing it
to be chronological? Or hiding items based on keywords?

Its our job as technologists to not only tell people if/when their request is
technologically impractical/impossible, but more importantly, to make informed
recommendations of what _is_ technically feasible and most closely matches
their intended goals (which they might not yet even fully understand
themselves).

~~~
at_a_remove
Eh, I haven't seen it in production.

I hate seeing politics of any stripe in my news feed, for example. I get
enough of it elsewhere. But how can Facebook take an image, recognize that it
is a cartoon, and that the cartoon is based on something political? We're not
there yet. We're not anywhere near there yet.

You and I, as humans in this time period, will likely recognize a drawing of a
man with kind of mocha-y skin, ears that stick straight out, large-ish front
teeth, and kind of a squint as a standard issue caricature of a particular
former President of the USA. We can immediately go "aha, politics!"

So I suppose we could try to train some AIs on a historical set of caricatures
of politically-relevant figures. Of course, caricaturists and cartoonists of
all stripes are called upon to produce new stylized exaggerations of people as
they step into the limelight (or are dragged into it), so our training set
must be updated on a daily basis. Hrm, some more work there ...

But then it gets into "politics you would like to hear" versus "politics you
would NOT like to hear," and that is just going to be something that will
require a mental model of what you do and do not like.

Right now, Amazon and Netflix cannot get my recommendations even CLOSE and
their data is much better curated than what someone might type into a Facebook
text box.

Chronological? Reasonable! Probably doable. Keywords? Who is putting those in?
Who is curating that set of keywords?

------
ordinaryradical
He’s standing up for what he believes. You can disagree with his convictions,
but you should admire anyone who risks personal and financial consequences for
sticking to their guns. That’s what actual morality is—not just a “belief”
that is talked about but acted upon even when the results will be costly.

~~~
blickentwapft
It’s a highly privileged position to be in to make a personal stand and leave
your $250,000 job for another $250,000 job.

Not judging this way or that, just saying.

~~~
oivey
Of course it is. Arguably the people with that privilege should have more
obligation to exercise it in the service of what’s right.

~~~
blickentwapft
Whilst his stance is to be applauded, it lessens the value of the stance given
that he’s not sacrificing much and won’t suffer for his cause.

Doesn’t mean it’s not the right thing to do, just that it would carry more
weight if he was leaving to go work at Burger King. Then you’d say “man that
guy stands tall”.

Edit: Ok reasonable criticism, I’ll withdraw.

~~~
whatshisface
He would stand even taller if while he was quitting Facebook, he was running
in to a burning building to save a child. Of course, while saving a child is
to be applauded, it lessens the value of his stance that he's not also saving
10,000 from starvation. Of course, that would be nothing next to achieving
world peace while eliminating corruption in every government in the world. I'm
not saying he shouldn't quit Facebook over his convictions, it's just that it
would be awfully nice if he solved every global problem and then was crucified
on an actual cross for doing it on the way out.

~~~
throwaway_pdp09
While there's no proof of life on other planets, there's equally no proof
there's not, and it might be suffering terribly and frankly I don't see this
guy doing anything about that either.

Until he does it's just virtue signalling.

(yeah, I don't get some people either)

------
12xo
Social media is fast food. If you eat it all the time it makes you feel awful
and will destroy your mental and physical health. But its cheap, easy to get
and tastes really good...

So stupid people love it.

~~~
kiplkipl
You're _on_ social media

~~~
seesawtron
HN is a forum, but very different from places like Facebook and Reddit.

~~~
kiplkipl
If that is a notable categorisation then what is the difference that makes
forums better?

~~~
seesawtron
I feel the trigger of social media is getting dopamine-like reward signal when
people like/share your posts. Its underlying acceptance of "you" aspect of it,
rather than the idea itself that you share. In a forum, being an anonymous
user, it doesn't affect you as much on a personal level which allows for a
more rational discussion by detaching the "personal" side of you from it. Of
course, that is only true in theory as we are all prone to taking everything
personally (myself included) but I try consciously to change that.

~~~
kiplkipl
This website has rapid interaction from other users and visible upvotes that
add up over time to create a personal score that nets you extra benefits. If I
worked for Facebook, I'd like stronger evidence than amateur psychology for me
to feel morally compelled to give up my livelihood.

Edit: furthermore many users post with real or pseudo-real names that reward
them with real life social clout.

~~~
seesawtron
For example, is there any revenue generated from people visiting users'
profiles on HN? But there is revenue from ads on Facebook and Instagram
profiles that millions subscribe to. There is no "subscription" like cult on
this forum (afaik). I do not see content based on whether user has high points
or not. Unlike social media, where people with more followers get more
visibility. So I think the scoring vs followers is not really comparable.

I use adblocker so I do not see ads on HN. Correct me if this is different
from your experience.

I can imagine, as you point out, the impact on "social life" for users with
real/pseudo real names. Back in the day forums were used for anonymous
discussions when you would not trust strangers on the internet. I guess now
the opposite is trending.

~~~
kiplkipl
I've expanded on this in another comment but I do think that YC gain a real
but indirect financial benefit from operating this website.

>Back in the day forums were used for anonymous discussions when you would not
trust strangers on the internet. I guess now the opposite is trending.

While writing this I was thinking of the famous 'LINUX is obsolete' thread.

------
nightski
I respect his decision. But I for one do not want our president, no matter who
she or he is to be censored. I want to know exactly what they are saying and
when. That includes any government official for that matter because it
directly affects my voting decisions and actions.

~~~
panzagl
Corporations using their power to silence an elected government official is
pretty much the corporate-fascist dystopia I thought we were all against.

~~~
volkk
it's a tough problem to solve or reason about. i personally don't have any
answers around this, but do you allow hate to spread and then be reactive
about it and deal with the consequences? or do you nip it at the bud
proactively allowing for potentially something that you wrote? some sort of
censorship. how do you deal with it?

~~~
s_y_n_t_a_x
How about don't remove anyone or anyone's post unless it's illegal?

Certainly don't target certain politicians while leaving others alone.

When you can't win your argument on merit, you censor.

It's up to the politicians and constituents to call out lies, why should some
Ministry of Truth decide what's a lie?

~~~
volkk
i don't necessarily disagree, but what happens when other
politicians/constituents aren't doing their jobs?

~~~
s_y_n_t_a_x
That's a hypothetical I disagree with.

Politicians will always address their counterparts and should always try to
inform their constituents. It's up to the constituents to stay educated.

Censoring politicians because people _might_ be too stupid is a really bad
reason.

~~~
volkk
sure, but realistically this is exactly what has been happening if you just
look at the last few years. many people are extremely misinformed and there
are tons of propaganda campaigns. finding the real truth is borderline
impossible. what is the solution? continue as is until someone more and more
radical comes along bending truth to their will? there's gotta be some middle
ground between a ministry of truth and just completely lawlessness.

~~~
s_y_n_t_a_x
> if you just look at the last few years

No, you've been told that because people aren't happy with the current status
quo.

There has always been propaganda and the truth is always possible to find.

Unless you have something specific I feel like you're using hyperboles (think
of the children!!!) to win your way.

It's not lawlessness, people aren't extremely misinformed (if they are that's
on them), the truth isn't borderline impossible.

This truth hunt will die out when the people seeking it are back in charge.

Yes remove threats, but don't remove lies. Having lies on your platform is not
lawlessness, it's the internet.

If you don't want lies then take 230 away from them and make them take down
libel/slander/lies that EVERYONE says, not just the people they choose to
target.

------
Fiveplus
It is overwhelming to see folks in the tech community come forward to support
a cause like this. Protesting and speaking up is one thing, leaving a job is
another. Kudos.

------
ganstyles
Kudos to them; this is great. I think both the resignation but also announcing
so directly are brave (they have career ops and compensation to think about).
Announcing publicly helps build a groundswell among tech workers not only at
Facebook but other tech companies.

Plenty of companies hiring, I know my company is specifically looking for good
people that are leaving because of layoffs and principled reasons.

------
code4tee
Zuckerberg has always made it clear to investors and employees that Facebook
is not a democracy. Mark is in charge and has full control of the company to
do as he pleases when he pleases. When they IPOed he made it clear that’s how
the company works. IPO materials made it clear that if you don’t like that
don’t invest in it.

Not saying I agree with his actions (or inactions) and decisions but he’s been
very clear about how Facebook works as a company and who’s in charge. Part of
the big issue I see here with these “employee protests” at Facebook is that it
seems employees didn’t pay attention to what they were signing up for when
they joined. Mark is doing exactly what he said he would do in running the
company. It’s not a democracy.

~~~
newacct583
That's somsething of a sideways argument though. I mean, it's speciously true
of any organization that isn't _actually_ a democracy. Google isn't a
democracy. Apple isn't a democracy.

But most corporate environments act at least a little like democracies anyway.
And that's not by choice, it's a darwinian thing. Companies that can't
motivate their employees to work towards shared goals don't tend to succeed.
And so on some level you absolutely do have to do what your employees want to
do.

And if you don't, they quit and work somewhere else. Which is literally what
the linked article is about. That thing up there in the headline? _That 's
democracy in action. At Facebook._

~~~
code4tee
Most large corporate environments don’t have the CEO as the sole controlling
shareholder in the company.

While CEOs are powerful and have a lot of autonomy on day-to-day decision
making they too are generally employees employed at the discretion of the
board. The board itself exists and is populated by individuals at the pleasure
of a diverse set of shareholders. There’s real accountability. That’s not the
case at Facebook. Again not saying that’s good or bad but the model was no
secret when people signed on.

------
swagonomixxx
First of all, I'm glad this person has seen the light and hopefully others
that work at Facebook will see the light and stop working for this evil
company.

With that out of the way though, I'm obligated to say that there have been
many stages in the lifecycle of Facebook where one could have said "how could
they do something this despicable" and leave for another "high impact" job,
and it saddens me that things have to reach such a high boiling point (what
with all the protests, riots, and so on going on in the US) in order for
people to actually realize that they've been propping up an extremely
disingenuous and immoral organization.

There have been many opportunities in Facebook's history to say, you know
what, what they're doing is really messed up, and it's really immoral, and I
can't put up with it anymore.

The cynic in me is saying that this person is piggybacking off of this
incredibly tense situation to go viral basically everywhere. His LinkedIn post
has north of 200K likes [0] and he'll have absolutely _no_ problem finding
work. I truly wish him the best of luck in doing so. But I'm honestly
disappointed that it's taken people this long to realize that Facebook is not
the bastion of good that they thought it was.

[0]: [https://www.linkedin.com/posts/timothy-j-
aveni_blacklivesmat...](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/timothy-j-
aveni_blacklivesmatter-activity-6673316720993824768-q_dU/)

~~~
luckylion
> But I'm honestly disappointed that it's taken people this long to realize
> that Facebook is not the bastion of good that they thought it was.

The cynic in me says that they haven't realized that at all. They've just made
a value judgement that making a loud public statement and switching to another
adtech surveillance capitalism corporation is a career move that will make
them more money than working at Facebook.

------
gfodor
It’s strange to me how the two things Facebook gets the most shit for, this
and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, are far down the list of reasons that I
see as reasons to abhor Facebook. In both cases there are sane arguments to be
made in Facebook’s defense, unlike other aspects like their decision on their
business model. However, if politics is what it takes for the exodus to begin,
so be it.

~~~
simsla
Can you elaborate what you think the main reasons should be? (Genuinely
interested.)

~~~
gfodor
The creation of a nearly impossible to control machine that profits off of
manipulating human behavior. A product with such toxic social systems it
brings out our worse selves and divides us from one another, feeding into our
base desires to read only opinions we agree with and see anyone else as
“others”, free to hate. I could go on :)

------
zarkov99
Fair enough I suppose. He would like to work in a place that is willing to
suppress the speech of the POTUS so as to avoid exciting the violent
ignoramus. I am glad that isn't Facebook and I hope he finds a nice job as
long as he is never, ever, put in a position where he gets to decide what
information others have access to.

------
fennecfoxen
The engineer describes Facebook as being on the "wrong side of History." I
take this opportunity to remind my fellow readers that History is not an
infallible goddess to be worshipped. The moral arc of the past several hundred
years has bent towards liberty and tolerance, but this has not been consistent
and was not inevitable. It is precisely when your values are on the "wrong
side of History" that you should be defending them the most strongly.

Justify your actions because they are right, not because they will be popular.

~~~
VikingCoder
I think you don't understand the phrase.

Optimists believe that the future will be better, that people will be wiser.

They believe that those future enlightened people will look back at some
people and actions, and believe that they were on the wrong side of history.

It's not a popularity contest. It's a belief that we get better over time by
making moral actions.

"It is precisely when your values are on the 'wrong side of History' that you
should be defending them the most strongly."

No one believes their own values are on the wrong side of History.

"Justify your actions because they are right, not because they will be
popular."

Everyone thinks their own values are right.

And if you are an optimist, you believe the future will be better. And so
therefore, you are advocating doing things that would make the future worse.
It's a very odd way to think.

Unless, you're a pessimist? And you think the future will be worse, and so
you're trying to prevent the backslide? And you're saying "screw you" to those
idiots in the future?

~~~
fennecfoxen
We have gathered here, by and large, to discuss and cheerlead a campaign which
calls for political censorship of a major political figure, one who earned the
vote of just under half of the USA. We assembled beg for a world in which a
megacorporation will enact content restrictions, deciding what types of view
are acceptable to express.

The politician in question, far from offering a meaningful alternative that
advances freedom, attempts to use his office to restrict opposing speech as
well. He may well win re-election and further implement policies which advance
the ideas the Facebook employee objects to.

Elsewhere in the world, the Chinese Communist Party builds its surveillance
state, installing their secret police in Hong Kong to crush protests.

Free speech may die within my lifetime, and the Chinese Communist Party in
particular is fairly well positioned to make a claim that history will be on
their side. Of course I'm a god damn pessimist.

~~~
VikingCoder
Hi, you're bending the words "right side of history" beyond how anyone else
uses them. So, don't be surprised if people have a hard time understanding
you.

You have legitimate concerns, but your phrasing of them is not easy for
_anyone else_ to follow.

~~~
fennecfoxen
If I am bending words, it is specifically to demonstrate how hollow they are,
how readily the cause of History can be co-opted by the utopian rhetoric of
strongmen and oppressors.

~~~
VikingCoder
If people can't understand your meaning, because you bend your words so hard,
that undermines your goal.

Cheers.

~~~
fennecfoxen
As far as I can tell, you're the only one who has a material misunderstanding
today.

~~~
VikingCoder
Cool, ignore feedback meant to help you communicate. Good luck with that.

~~~
fennecfoxen
Thank you for this latest feedback, just as condescending as the earlier
feedback.

~~~
VikingCoder
I meant it constructively. But I accept your criticism that it sounded
condescending. I'll try to work on that.

------
Nexusie
This is what solidarity should look like, It takes courage to walk away from a
company such as Facebook but it's a great move nonetheless. We should not
become complicit

~~~
SpaceManNabs
why the but and the nonetheless?

~~~
Nexusie
Figure of speech.I think most would feel scared by leaving a company as big as
Facebook and the backlash or job possibilities being clouded if they'd leave a
company on bad terms

------
hart_russell
And once again we’re back in 2018 trying to figure out whether these private
companies should be considered “public squares”.

I personally think speech censorship, even by a private company, is wrong.
However, there’s so much grey area that one could argue either way.

~~~
commandlinefan
> speech censorship, even by a private company

It seems to me that Facebook (or at least Mark Zuckerberg) actually agrees
with you and _wants_ FB to be an open platform, but are being pressured by
activists to censor against their wishes. This kind of goes beyond "they're a
private company, they can do what they want": it would appear that they can't
do what they want.

~~~
blueterminal
I am just amazed that people are for private companies censoring politicians.
You really don't want to see __everything __politicians want to tell you? Even
if it 's a complete lie? You want Mark and Jack and others to hide that info
from you?

What is going on? I feel I am completely losing touch. It's scary.

~~~
dagmx
People keep jumping between the extremes of “show or don’t show the post”

There are options in between like decrying the post for violence. Twitter did
a good job here IMHO by having the post visible, but restricted behind a click
through. They also didn’t cast aspersions on it, and sent you to more links to
learn more.

------
Descartes1
I wouldn't hire this person. But I'm glad he found a job.

~~~
Garbage
Can you please explain why would you not hire this person?

~~~
jimmaswell
If I were running a platform, I wouldn't want employees that would quit on me
over not censoring news on the platform exactly to their taste.

------
Trasmatta
Interesting that someone would give a public resignation like this but still
give two weeks notice (presuming he gave notice on Monday). I'd imagine it
likely that the company would just let him go immediately after making a
public statement.

~~~
toyg
He had to do it because of contractual obligations, obviously. He's probably
on garden-leave now. Standard procedure for resignations in a big security-
aware company (which I hope FB is) is to immediately suspend all access and
escort out of the building. You can always ask him to come back to help with
stuff later, as a visitor.

So in the end, firing him after he resigned like this would be
counterproductive: you don't gain any organizational advantage and you're
actually inviting trouble from the media.

------
gorgoiler
Focus on impact. Do you have more leverage as an ongoing employee, or as a
soon-to-be outsider who literally called the CEO a liar?

If it’s personal morality then so be it, but if that’s the case then keep it
personal, otherwise you are really just virtue signaling.

I suspect June 12 being their last day is wishful thinking. If I treated my
employer with this much contempt I would expect to be a walked out.

~~~
frob
As a former FB employee, I can almost assure you that he will get to stay
until June 12. The PR trainwreck that would be firing him not is not worth 7
days of his salary.

~~~
jcims
You can do both. A local private-sector employer has a category of employee
that is walked out generally within the hour of tending notice of their
resignation. It's a standard protocol, everyone is aware, there are parameters
but they are paid for the time they are out and most folks will start doing
some basic KT ahead of time to avoid the void.

It's obviously a bit silly but this is where lessons from the past have landed
the company.

------
Aunche
I get a sense that he would be equally upset at Facebook if they had followed
their content policy and censored the George Floyd video. The reality is that
Facebook doesn't want to censor anything that is "newsworthy." The President's
stance on the riots is certainly something that many people would be
interested to know.

------
brenden2
I appreciate anyone who has the courage to do this. I've done it before, and
it's definitely hard. Congrats and I wish more people would stand up for
themselves and others.

It's always better to receive downvotes and do the right thing, than merely
sit by and go along with the hive. Especially when you know in your gut the
hive is wrong.

------
zubspace
Well, we live in a time where information spreads faster than the news. We see
history developing in front of our eyes on sites like twitter, reddit or
facebook before they move through the newspaper filter. It's a wonderful thing
to behold.

On the other hand, we also get in touch with radical posts or "fake news" or
news which try to influence readers in various forms from all different kinds
of sources.

So on one hand, our tech enabled information to move more freely. On the other
hand, extreme, biased or untrue information can be dangerous.

But we don't have the means to filter or flag this content objectively in an
automated fashion. That's why we have a problem. And as long as humans are
involved in this filtering process, we have other problems.

It's very similar to self-driving: As long as we cannot find a way to make
this 100% automated and safe according to rules we all adhere to, we won't
find a solution.

------
samizdis
Well said and all best wishes for the future.

> My last day will be June 12th.

Well ... it _might_ just come a little sooner than that ;-)

Much respect. I salute you.

~~~
MiroF
> Well ... it might just come a little sooner than that ;-)

Why would it come sooner? You think they would fire him a week early just so
he can claim unemployment from them?

~~~
samizdis
No, not fire him - he's just resigned - I mean put him on "gardening leave"
from now until his official last day.

~~~
MiroF
Oh yeah, absolutely.

------
aeyes
If you like it or not, free speech works in two directions. A private company
censoring the president is not the right approach.

It's our job as a society to not blindly follow what is being said by
politicians and more importantly, to take action with our vote.

------
nemo44x
A solution to this would be to use congress instead of expecting companies to
comply.

Create a law that prevents elected or people who have declared themselves a
candidate for office from using social media platforms. Extend it to their
offices/teams/associates etc.

Politics shouldn’t be reduced to 160 characters in my opinion. I don’t want to
live in a society where this is the primary way this kind of important
information is conveyed.

Keep social networks for the chattering class, not the political class.

------
hn_1234
I read this word " privilege" more in the comments. I just want to say to all
used it , leaving a job with a public stunt from a high paying job is never an
easy decision for anyone. We all love money. But when someone chose to stand
up for what they thought is right, is a big thing. I believe we should honor
and respect that. Being dismissive or saying he/she is privileged to make a
decision is nothing but dishonor.

------
dstola
People that speak out in favour of virtue and signalling thereof get praise
and admiration, other people that speak their opinion, which may be
unconventional, get fired from their jobs or lose scholarships to
universities. How did it come to this? Seems like this situation is a
grotesque twisting of freedom of expression, something that the internet was
supposed to endorse, not condemn.

------
throw7
I don't use facebook, but I thought trump posts on twitter, not facebook? Is
there a trump site on facebook that also posts his twitter stuff?

------
zelphirkalt
Congratulation to new found insight.

I am wondering though, how much eye closing exactly is needed, to work for FB
for any stretch of time.

I guess for some people the glass can still overspill and they can only take
that much. At some point some reason comes along, that makes it easier to just
leave and give the exterior a good explanation for leaving. That's actually a
good thing. Shows, that some conscience is still there.

------
voldacar
Stunning and brave!

~~~
macspoofing
To be fair, quitting a high-paying job for moral reasons in the midst of a
pandemic and a major recession takes courage. I don't agree with his view, but
I'll give him that much at least.

------
vmception
Is pretty much the consensus within my friend groups who joined Facebook left
than a year ago is

"yeah but cmon you know what you're at Facebook for, it isn't for a moral
debate" _cue laughter_

I would be more impressed to see people quitting that just got their $100K
signing bonus and were within their first year of vesting, feeling kind of
probationary.

------
zirror
Fulltext for people who blocked facebook:

 _I 'm resigning from my job at Facebook.

For years, President Trump has enjoyed an exception to Facebook’s Community
Standards; over and over he posts abhorrent, targeted messages that would get
any other Facebook user suspended from the platform. He’s permitted to break
the rules, since his political speech is “newsworthy.”

“when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”

Mark always told us that he would draw the line at speech that calls for
violence. He showed us on Friday that this was a lie. Facebook will keep
moving the goalposts every time Trump escalates, finding excuse after excuse
not to act on increasingly dangerous rhetoric. Since Friday, I’ve spent a lot
of time trying to understand and process the decision not to remove the
racist, violent post Trump made Thursday night, but Facebook, complicit in the
propagation of weaponized hatred, is on the wrong side of history.

I cannot keep excusing Facebook’s behavior. Facebook is providing a platform
that enables politicians to radicalize individuals and glorify violence, and
we are watching the United States succumb to the same kind of social media-
fueled division that has gotten people killed in the Philippines, Myanmar, and
Sri Lanka. I’m scared for my country and I’m done trying to justify this.

My last day will be June 12th. If you have contacts in the San Francisco Bay
Area looking to recruit a software engineer, please DM me.

#blacklivesmatter_

------
arexxbifs
I guess selling people's innermost thoughts for a bit of ad revenue is OK in
his book, then.

------
fred_dev
I admire you, and I hope you get a better position in a more ethical
environment. All the best

------
seemslegit
Can't read and admire person for quitting job at facebook because content is
on facebook.

------
mychael
Zuckerberg has been very principled on free speech and Facebook and society as
a whole is better for it. I hope this FB employee is replaced with someone
more grounded on liberal ideals of free speech, tolerance and openness.

------
macspoofing
I respect the moral stance he took, though that this is a public open letter
is a little self-serving (but even with that quitting a well-paying job in the
midst of a pandemic and a huge recession is not easy).

I disagree wholeheartedly with his position that Facebook should be wading
into politics and interpreting Trump's tweets and posts because with Trump
(and even politics in general) everything is in the eye of the beholder. It's
one of the most frustrating things with the Trump presidency where the same
statement will be interpreted in WILDLY different ways by those that hate
Trump and those that love Trump. The most surreal example of this was when
Trump called MS-13 members 'Animals' and it was interpreted by many people and
the media as a dog-whistle that all immigrants are 'animals'. Trump for sure
brings this bad faith on himself with his temperment, but that just reinforces
the view that a platform like Facebook should wade into this quagmire with
trepidation because once you get in, you open a pandora's box of unintended
consequences.

~~~
cestith
It may be self-serving but it may also be targeted to other Facebook employees
and recruits or to the general FB-using public to let folks know how dire and
complete their complicity with things is.

As someone who is repeatedly contacted by FAANG recruiters, I can tell you
there are two of them I keep asking hard questions about company culture and
role in society. They stop responding, then a different recruiter reaches out
a few months later. I imagine you can guess which two.

~~~
macspoofing
>It may be self-serving but it may also be targeted to other Facebook
employees and recruits or to the general FB-using public to let folks know how
dire and complete their complicity with things is.

Fair enough and I do consider his action to be a moral stance that took
courage to make. And I certainly respect your decision to not work for these
companies.

Having said that, I think you are way overstating how bad FB or Twitter or
Google is (I wasn't sure which two companies you were talking about). And I
say that because I look at the full picture of the economy that has, for
example, timeshare companies, payday lenders, banks and credit card companies,
casinos, alcohol and beer companies, pharmaceuticals (especially with
opiates). Products from those companies can have terrible real-world
consequences on people that may take decades to rectify, and then when I look
at Facebook and the negative things they bring .. Facebook doesn't even rank.
I'm sure FB has problems that they need to work on fixing but the hyperbole
around them is so outrageously disproportionate, it feels like gaslighting.

~~~
cestith
If you think abiding fascism can't have real-world, long term consequences
please review your history. The same if you think abuse of having everyone's
private data is no big deal.

The two companies, by the way, are Facebook and Amazon. Unfortunately I'm in a
position that I use both, but I don't intend to work for either as things
currently stand. I'd probably go to Amazon before Facebook, but I have
concerns about their treatment of warehouse staff and entering markets they've
built around other sellers and undercutting them.

------
sizzle
He took a direct shot at Facebook's culture and it's highly effective PR,
hopefully many others open their eyes on what they are supporting when they
choose to execute orders from the top down and stay.

------
newbie578
Good for you man. Especially if you think Facebook, or rest of Silicon Valley
(except Jack Dorsey) cares.

Does anyone know if we can already apply for his "soon to be empty" position?
:)

------
sys_64738
I'm sure you'll survive. But most other companies don't have ad dollars
fueling your 500k$ salary so you might need to look for a few bucks less.

------
chadlavi
Sure, great. Good.

But without the followup call to action, "... and you should too," this is
just self-congratulatory behavior.

Don't just clap, follow this guy's lead.

------
eruci
If his job description did include censorship policy, good for him to resign.
Otherwise he is throwing rocks up the wrong tree for 5 minutes of fame.

------
shill_predictor
>A junior software engineer taking a stance on a public matter goes to front
page on HN.

I guess you are really emotional on this topic.

------
tonfreed
Facebook deliberately drives wedges in between people to drive engagement.
Burn it down for all I care.

------
NoblePublius
He just hit one year according to his linkedin. I wonder what he vested into
last week.

~~~
ISL
Viewed another way: If he waited to vest, that means he took away a
substantial sum of Facebook's money.

It is a good thing when thoughtful people have resources.

~~~
kinkrtyavimoodh
By that logic, he could have taken even more money by continuing to work.

~~~
ISL
Continuing to work would abet processes with which he disagrees.

------
misiti3780
Can someone paste the text for those of us that have blocked all facebook
subdomains?

~~~
dredmorbius
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23417060](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23417060)

------
bananamerica
In this topic: many pessimists struggling to twist a virtuous act into a bad
thing.

------
Consultant32452
It amazes me that people haven't caught onto the shtick yet. Trump keeps doing
this to them over and over again. Trump takes some popular position and
exaggerates it or maybe just plainly takes the position a little too far. And
then his opposition, who reflexively just put a negative sign in front of
everything he says, come out strongly against the popular opinion.
"Propagation of weaponized hatred" is lunacy. At worst it's an exaggeration or
slight overstep of the popular mainstream opinion.

People want the police to come in and stop the looting and burning of small
businesses. Seeing people calling these peaceful protests while there's
literal burning cars in the background is the most Orwellian thing I've ever
seen. And when you point that out you get the "just a few bad apples"
argument, which makes it even more hilarious.

------
jeffrallen
Good luck dude. Hope the stain on your CV is not already too great.

------
baron_harkonnen
I was supposed to interview at Facebook this week. My company is struggling
and I expect I’ll be laid off before the year is over, so I figured that maybe
I could push my ethical frustrations with the company aside and just go make
some good money and ignore the fact that this company is undermining democracy
and many of the things I value.

Seeing resignations from existing Facebook employees really woke me up and
made me realize that I can’t sacrifice my values for a paycheck and stable
employment.

I contacted the recruiter at the beginning of the week and told them I was
going to stop the process and my reasons.

I hope that engineers taking a stand like the OP know that it is having an
impact.

It’s tempting to be cynical, no job in tech right now is without faults, so
why not just play the capitalist game? Everyone makes their own choices, but
struggling to make the right choice for you is better than refusing to
struggle.

~~~
euix
In a similar boat here. I am not in danger of losing my job but I kinda
thought I spend some time at Facebook see what "state of the art" looks like
for a big tech company and then do something else a few years down the line. I
passed their coding screen and I am waiting to schedule a full day interview
but as far as the big tech companies go Facebook does get a bad rap. Although
I think its unavoidable. I used work in NYC making not as much as a FANG
worker but enough money to know, it's impossible to make that kind of cash
without moral compromises. It's simply a feature of the capitalist system,
companies like FB are just taking it to its logical extremes, the
commodification of your society down to the individual level.

------
yogthos
Anybody working for Facebook is knowingly and willingly helping promote
fascism. These people have some of the best job options out there, and they're
actively choosing to work for a company that's actively harmful to society.

~~~
sparkling
Facebook is promoting "facism" for not deleting Trump?

lol

~~~
yogthos
Might want to read up on some of Facebook history in promoting extremist
ideology because it's good business. Here are a couple of links to get you
started

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-
di...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-
executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499)

[https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_PIRUS_UseOfSocialMediaB...](https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_PIRUS_UseOfSocialMediaByUSExtremists_ResearchBrief_July2018.pdf)

------
linsomniac
I wonder if this is related to JWZ's call yesterday for Facebook employees to
quit.

[edit: Removed link. JWZ: Not cool. Archive.org link in reply below]

~~~
ddalex
JWZ links to disgusting image when accessed with HN as referrer, I suggest you
remove this link.

~~~
thrwaway69
Holy shit. I was wondering why so many old hn accounts were linking to an
insulting meme and this was upvoted in few other threads so I wonder what
those people saw.

------
dredmorbius
Related:

Thread on June 2 MZ@FB open call with employees:

[https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1267891378102497281.html](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1267891378102497281.html)

NYT: Zuckerberg Defends Hands-Off Approach to Trump’s Posts

[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/02/technology/zuckerberg-
def...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/02/technology/zuckerberg-defends-
facebook-trump-posts.html)

------
yters
do we get a better outcome if morally upstanding quit the platform, or stay to
make things better?

------
annoyingnoob
My solution has always been to not bother with Facebook. A few employees
quitting was already on Mark's radar, he expected that and is willing to
accept that. Honestly seems like Mark fears actions by Trump against social
media - Mark cares about the existential threat, he can hire more people. A
very large boycott of Facebook by its users might actually get Mark's
attention. We seem to have forgotten how to effectively boycott for change.

------
yters
so he resigns over a post by trump vs all the other egregious things facebook
has done?

------
blaufast
It’s about time this started happening! Facebook employees of HN, how about
joining him?

~~~
ikeyany
Possibly worried about the money and status bump from having Facebook on their
resume.

But having on your resume that you left Facebook because of this would be the
biggest status bump of all.

~~~
blaufast
Agreed. If Tech cares about the diversity as much as it claims, it’s hard to
think this would damage ones career.

------
docmars
Good riddance, I guess?

------
pluc
If you resign from Facebook and don't tell anyone, have you really resigned?

~~~
natex
I feel like your question is snark designed to criticise the vocal/dramatic
way the FB employee has resigned. I hope I'm wrong. Personally, I'm grateful
for their post. I think it is designed to bring awareness to the problem and
to pressure FB to do the right thing.

~~~
acwan93
I've seen this one person's resignation on nearly every site I follow this
past week. My hope is that this is the start of a substantial shift in the
company with more employees walking out (I don't believe senior management
there will do anything on their own), otherwise it's just what the parent
commenter's implying: a lot of noise.

------
Communitivity
For background: I am a married white male, in 50s, with one teenage child, and
I've made a comfortable 6 figure income for a number of years now. And I had
three honorary godfathers that were my father's best friends and good friends
of the family (Haitian, an ex-Black Panther, and an Asian-American real-estate
broker). But I wasn't always comfortable - I have worked in metal finishing
plants, leather-working plants, and for ARC when I was much younger and
struggling. This whole thread speaks to privilege to me.

There are people who do not vote because they cannot afford the couple hours
or so away from their job without fear of getting fired. And we think someone
should quit, before even getting another job, if they disagree with a
company's stance on a social media issue?

If you were a cop, then yes..I could see quitting, though the braver thing
would be to stay, rise, and change from the inside (just watch your back).

You want to help, and your organization is not one of the ones actually
killing Americans? Don't quit your job. Unless you are truly essential
personnel you leaving will be a hit, but one the company can likely recover
from pretty quickly with not too much pain. Instead: Speak out; take a stance;
help protesters and civil rights leaders locally with your donated skills.
Better yet, also work to convince your company to take a stand.

I applaud anyone's desire to protest, in any way they feel comfortable with. I
also applaud anyone's desire to be an ally without protesting, in however you
can, if you feel you have to protect your life and those around you and
protesting scares you too much that you won't be able to do that. I do not
applaud anyone who protests as a way of getting likes, or protests as a way to
act out, or protests as a way to say 'look at me'.

Also, if you protest..act out, but abhor violence. As Presiden Obama
said..civil disobedience and the political process are not mutually exclusive
and must be used hand in hand together until you are heard.

Actions speak louder that words. I abhor violence now, and do not advocate it,
but I remember an incident when I was 10 in W.Va. A senior in high school, a
white kid, was picking on three of us, myself and and white boy (B) in my
class and an African-American (C) in our class. He was picking on the African-
American boy the most, with racial epithets and physical shoving and
occasional punch as he would walk by. This happened over a span of time.

C was upset but didn't want to tell his parents. He told me was ashamed that
he was being singled out. Let that sink in a moment. The victim felt ashamed
for being victimized. The other boy B said we should avoid him as best we
could, changing where we played and missing out on playing on the river. It
happened again and again until I got fed up, picked a broom up by the handle,
swung it over my head and whacked the senior in the head with the other end,
making him need 5 stitches. I should have tried non-violent actions, but I did
something, whereas B did not. I got a lot of trouble for that, but he never
picked on any of us again.

The point of the story is that action that has impact is needed. Action
without action is action for the sake of saying you did something. And yes, I
abhor violence now, but I cannot blame people for violence during protests
when they can go buy baby formula in the middle of the night and wonder if
they'll be killed by those who are supposed to protect us, for the crime of
DWB.

------
ranci
What if I told you I don't care?

------
dionian
I've never seen so many people try to censor a political rival as recently
with President Trump.

If you can make a compelling argument in the marketplace of free ideas, you
don't need to censor.

If they are going to censor Trump for calling the looters 'thugs', they need
to censor the people calling for violence against cops (which is way worse)

------
daleharvey
Today I opened facebook to reply to a message from my mum, I got autoplaying
videos of Candace Owens and Ben Shapiro "destroying" liberals and trying to
discredit George Floyd. I hope we come out of this period with a better
understanding of the responsibility we have of the effect of the technology we
build, pretending the things we build are neutral and hiding behind "free
speech" is not working

~~~
macspoofing
I don't follow Candace Owens so I can't speak to that, but Ben Shapiro has
been very sympathetic towards justice for the murder of George Floyd and
calling on the cop to be punished - pretty much daily since the video came
out.

Why would you say he's trying to discredit George Floyd?

~~~
daleharvey
The Ben Shapiro video was the one title "destroying liberals" arguing against
women being able to access healthcare / have abortions, the Candace Owens one
was talking about how George Floyd wasnt a martyr.

Ben Shapiro's twitter is predictably a constant stream of ridiculing the
protests, that isnt being sympathetic towards justice for the murder, thats
just saying something obvious that people have to agree with you before you
announce your contrarian view.

~~~
macspoofing
>Ben Shapiro's twitter is predictably a constant stream of ridiculing the
protests

I don't follow his twitter, but, at least on his radio show, he criticizes
rioters and looters and takes care to differentiate them from protestors. I
think that's fair. Rioting and looting is not the same as protesting.

------
pedro_hab
This is all nonsense to me.

Trump said if you loot, you get shot. Isn't this how our society works?

If you steal you may end up getting shot.

People are trying to react as if he said "if you walk down the street you'll
get shot".

Sensitive topic, I guess.

* EDIT: The nonsense part is people calling Trump to be censored, like OP.

I am not condoning violence but I do think looting may lead to it, it's not
too far from the truth.

I think the argument is that he wanted to cause violence with his comments,
which could be true, but seems like an idiotic to argue over that.

What he said seems to be a fact, so I am not convinced he should be censored

~~~
tibbydudeza
Yes in a fascist society sure but the use of deadly force by the police is
usually only when a life is in danger and not any property.

Usually non lethal means are employed when the police are following SOP i.e
teargas/water or a baton charge.

~~~
CapricornNoble
Except that "looting -> shooting" doesn't necessarily involve the police at
all, because the American population is armed and, in many jurisdictions,
empowered to use lethal force in certain circumstances.

A few examples: [https://www.startribune.com/man-shot-dead-outside-lake-
stree...](https://www.startribune.com/man-shot-dead-outside-lake-street-
pawnshop-during-unrest-is-identified/570865962/)

[https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-protests-
looting-...](https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-protests-looting-gun-
store-south-philly-shot-dead-20200602.html)

There's also the flip side, where determined and armed looters slay the
innocent: [https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/03/us/david-dorn-st-louis-
po...](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/03/us/david-dorn-st-louis-police-shot-
trnd/index.html)

At any rate, the President's tweet of "when the looting starts, the shooting
starts" is an accurate statement, irrespective of the employment of the
police, martial law, fascism, etc...

------
dpeterson
Oh he's so brave demanding censorship for the masses. President Trump speaks
for those that have lost their voice in the chicomm and leftist controlled
media and big tech. As he says himself, big tech censors those that dare speak
the truth.

I don't care, let the downvoting and misguided leftist justice ensue on my
hacker news account. After all, you must censor my speech any way you can.

------
JungleGymSam
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

------
aphextron
And yet, the machine keeps churning along. Facebook is what it looks like when
an open democratic society develops cancer.

------
sparkling
> i resigned because my employeer refuses to censor a user (in this case, the
> POTUS) who says things i disagree with

wow, imagine being this entitled

------
sunseb
All these "good" people pushing for censorship of a democratically elected
president and social networks. Don't you see this is precisely what tyranny
looks like?

------
thrownaway954
this dude is just being an attention grabber now. yesterday he posted to
linkedin and now today facebook. what's next? a frontpage ad in the nyt or a
billboard in times square? great... you quit your job on your beliefs, who
really gives a sh*t.

~~~
ogre_codes
A big chunk of any protest is getting your voice heard. So yeah, he's trying
to grab attention. That is entirely the point here.

~~~
thrownaway954
more of a kid crying that he doesn't like the way things are than a protest in
my book, but your entitled to your opinion.

~~~
ogre_codes
Likewise your very comment can be dismissed as a kid crying (You are just
jealous he's getting more attention than you).

If you don't respect the right of others to speak out, don't expect your
opinions to be respected in turn.

------
ycombonator
What happened to everyone leaving Facebook when Hillary lost ? Their active
users have grown orders of magnitude since then.

~~~
natex
> Their active users have grown orders of magnitude since then

That's a bit of an overstatement.
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-
monthly...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-
active-facebook-users-
worldwide/#:~:text=With%20over%202.6%20billion%20monthly,network%20ever%20to%20do%20so).

------
krzyk
So he doesn't believe that one should be able to protect their property?

If looting is not the one that should be discouraged with shots, then what
about rape? If that also not, then where it starts?

How do you stop looters? Asking nicely? Mob has its own personality and it
doesn't have conscious.

I don't like current US president (BTW I'm not US citizen, nor do I live
there), but that quote wasn't the one people should complain about.

~~~
vmception
yeah the property is unfortunate, but why are police killing citizens with
little accountability?

thats the focus here, don't get it reversed

~~~
krzyk
> ... why are police killing citizens with little accountability?

Any statistics to back that up?

"it is known" is not good data

~~~
vmception
which part would you like data on?

police killing citizens?

what is your goal post on accountability?

I'll try to match those standards with sources once I know what your standards
are

------
sktrdie
Presidents have all kinds of privileges that others don’t. Why should their
privilege on social-media be diminished? To me the problem is not the platform
but the fact that they have such exceptional privilege to begin with.

What I don't understand is how you can be Facebook _employee_ and also think
the platform is the problem - lots of these especially in the React community
[1].

If you believe Facebook is the problem, and you're quite vocal about it, and
you continue working for Facebook, then that seems as close to paradoxical as
you can possibly get.

If that's the case you are by definition working for a company which values
you disagree with. That's similar to working for an oil company while being a
climate change activist on social media.

1\.
[https://twitter.com/dan_abramov/status/1267544361929256966](https://twitter.com/dan_abramov/status/1267544361929256966)

~~~
simion314
>Why should their privilege on social-media be diminished?

Why should a president, prime minister or government/parliament member should
have "privilege" ? should they be allowed to swear or show their naked ass on
public TV because they are special? The rules should apply equal to all
citizens no exceptions for the ones in power.

IMO the algorithm that decides if a post should be banned or not should not
have as input who is the author.

~~~
andrewflnr
The next sentence of GP is

> To me the problem is not the platform but the fact that they have such
> exceptional privilege to begin with.

------
ninjaturtlez
Can Facebook fuck off with closing the current tab I am in whenever I click
one of their links? Sometimes undoing the closed tab doesn't work and there is
no way to recover my previous tabs history.

This has gotten so annoying and used to be things we only expected from spam
sites

~~~
naavis
That's most likely Firefox's Facebook container. Once you click on a link that
leads outside Facebook, the container closes and you can't go back anymore.

------
xwdv
Why would you hire this guy? What tech companies wants employees that are just
going to walk off whenever some crisis of the year erupts? Why not take a
stand and continue to work to make Facebook better from within?

I know, because he doesn't actually give a shit about Facebook and this is a
convenient way for him to gain some social exposure while also quitting a job
he wanted to quit for a while anyway. He happily took home the $250k loot for
years. Is he donating a good portion of that excess cash to relevant
organizations? Probably not.

------
noad
There is nothing praise-worthy about taking a stand now, you should have been
out of there ten years ago or never started to begin with. Zuckerberg has been
consistently out of control and unaccountable since the Beacon fiasco, which
was in like 2008.

This is slightly more annoying than all the government officials who only dare
criticize the executive branch after they retire. We have way more data over a
longer period of time about how horrible this company is, you should have
figured it out a long time ago.

The last thing I want to read in 2020 is essays from wealthy tech workers who
already cashed out talking about "taking a stand". You're not brave, you're a
coward.

~~~
DoofusOfDeath
We praise people for changing in a positive direction. If we wait for
perfection, we couldn't praise anything.

