> His naiveté was about the nature of Google and how he thought a giant corporation basing their revenue on ads and collecting information could be a positive force in the world and not abuse its power.
I agree with your refinement. Admittedly the first part of my comment was a rant on a bigger topic that rubs me the wrong way every now and then -- with the slight clarification that to me "an American" isn't "USA-born", it's more like "has lived in USA for a long time".
> It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy
I think so too but then again, a big company changing ethics is also smart enough to know they have to peddle certain propaganda at their more naive hard workers. Sadly it has been the case ever since written history and it seems to be a general weakness of the human brain: we can trade things in our lives (physical and mental health, personal happiness, alone time, leisure time etc.) for some "bigger cause".
People are especially vulnerable to these "bigger causes require sacrifices" propaganda when they are young. And such huge companies are run by excellent psychologists (I mean that higher management / politicians naturally are such) and they know how to manipulate those younger people.
> if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better.
Herein lies the conundrum, you are correct. And I'd point out that maybe you here are projecting some naivete: we are not ants, dude, and we don't possess collective hive-mind consciousness so we cannot ever all work together towards a common cause.
For every single programmer refusing to work due to warped company ethics there are 1000 more waiting in Africa / India / Eastern Europe / Brazil / etc. These companies' awful ethics will never disappear because the world is too big and there is always somebody who will pick up the job.
The only way out is this: that the jobs require so much expertise, experience and a surgical touch that a random hungry team from India cannot ever hope to do the job properly. And for a number of positions inside big companies this is already the case. However the temptation to hire cheaper devs is too great and the companies usually sink a lot of money in those "cheaper" devs until they realize they aren't saving any money due to reduced quality of work, huge communication overhead, general chaos and no planning, and several other such nasty problems that the cheaper dev teams always seem to carry with them.
> You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it.
I am completely with you here. The thing is though, what we find bad/evil about Twitter's model is what other people absolutely LOVE about it. What can you do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I agree with your refinement. Admittedly the first part of my comment was a rant on a bigger topic that rubs me the wrong way every now and then -- with the slight clarification that to me "an American" isn't "USA-born", it's more like "has lived in USA for a long time".
> It seems to me his gripe is about the hypocrisy
I think so too but then again, a big company changing ethics is also smart enough to know they have to peddle certain propaganda at their more naive hard workers. Sadly it has been the case ever since written history and it seems to be a general weakness of the human brain: we can trade things in our lives (physical and mental health, personal happiness, alone time, leisure time etc.) for some "bigger cause".
People are especially vulnerable to these "bigger causes require sacrifices" propaganda when they are young. And such huge companies are run by excellent psychologists (I mean that higher management / politicians naturally are such) and they know how to manipulate those younger people.
> if people denies the company ethics problems, you can be sure they are not going to get better.
Herein lies the conundrum, you are correct. And I'd point out that maybe you here are projecting some naivete: we are not ants, dude, and we don't possess collective hive-mind consciousness so we cannot ever all work together towards a common cause.
For every single programmer refusing to work due to warped company ethics there are 1000 more waiting in Africa / India / Eastern Europe / Brazil / etc. These companies' awful ethics will never disappear because the world is too big and there is always somebody who will pick up the job.
The only way out is this: that the jobs require so much expertise, experience and a surgical touch that a random hungry team from India cannot ever hope to do the job properly. And for a number of positions inside big companies this is already the case. However the temptation to hire cheaper devs is too great and the companies usually sink a lot of money in those "cheaper" devs until they realize they aren't saving any money due to reduced quality of work, huge communication overhead, general chaos and no planning, and several other such nasty problems that the cheaper dev teams always seem to carry with them.
> You can't be naive about its ethics because you just have to doom-scroll the app for an hour to feel bad about it.
I am completely with you here. The thing is though, what we find bad/evil about Twitter's model is what other people absolutely LOVE about it. What can you do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯