> I've not talked to Facebook employees personally but I've witnessed the same degree of delusion at other large tech companies. Some are straight-up like a cult with employees willing to defend just about anything their company does regardless of how hazardous it was. Which is even more baffling if one takes into consideration that these are usually salaried employees working there only for a few years with no personal stake whatsoever.
Well I think I can solve this puzzle. It's possible some people disagree with you about how "hazardous" their company is.
They're not "cult-like" or "delusional". They're not willing to "defend just about anything" despite the fact that they are only there a few years.
They just don't agree with you on the amount of hazard their companies are doing.
Note: This is regardless of whether you are in fact right or wrong. But it kind of bugs me that someone not having the same views is branded in such a way, as if somehow clearly you know the truth, so anyone who isn't automatically on your side must be delusional/evil in some way.
> But it kind of bugs me that someone not having the same views is branded in such a way, as if somehow clearly you know the truth, so anyone who isn't automatically on your side must be delusional/evil in some way.
That's not what I believe at all. I've had plenty of discussions in my life with people from all kinds of sectors and the tech industry, in particular, FAANG employees in my experience stand out in this way. If you talk to someone from the Big 4 like PWC I never exactly got the impression that they're overly attached to their companies point of view.
Tech companies have very cleverly fostered some sort of ideological atmosphere among their employees that makes them defensive about their wrongdoings, and they have long pushed the idea that they're not just vehicles to create profit for shareholders but on world-saving missions.
As another example, remember when Uber essentially spammed mayor DeBlasio's office through their app in an attempt to undermine regulation and to effectively get ahead of the law through a harassment campaign? At that time I talked to Uber employees and a good chunk defended it.
Can you imagine any ordinary industry acting like this?
> Can you imagine any ordinary industry acting like this?
You mean proactively explaining to their workforce the reasoning behind actions likely to gain widespread attention in the press?
Yes; that's called treating your employees with respect. Everyone generally expects employees to have some level of insider knowledge, and it's polite to give your workers enough of a heads-up to not be blindsided by questions from friends and family.
The difference with Facebook and some other tech companies is that there's enough trust that employees are generally better informed about the strategic and competitive landscape the company is operating in, and that context can explain actions that may look nonsensical from the outside.
More industries should work like this, not less -- It's treating workers as people that can think for themselves instead of simply cogs in the machine.
Well I think I can solve this puzzle. It's possible some people disagree with you about how "hazardous" their company is.
They're not "cult-like" or "delusional". They're not willing to "defend just about anything" despite the fact that they are only there a few years.
They just don't agree with you on the amount of hazard their companies are doing.
Note: This is regardless of whether you are in fact right or wrong. But it kind of bugs me that someone not having the same views is branded in such a way, as if somehow clearly you know the truth, so anyone who isn't automatically on your side must be delusional/evil in some way.