Skip to main content

Why I'm No Longer On The Facebook

I've had a Facebook account for a few years, largely because other people were on it and were organizing useful communities there.  I stuck with it (not using it for private information) even while I grew increasingly concerned about Facebook's inability to be trustworthy guardians of private information.  The recent slap on the wrist from the FTC for Facebook violating the terms of its prior consent agreement made it clear that there wasn't going to be any penalty for Facebook for continuing to violate court orders.

Mark Zuckerberg claimed he had made a mistake in 2016 by ridiculing the idea of election interference on his platform, apologized, and claimed he was turning over a new leaf:
“After the election, I made a comment that I thought the idea misinformation on Facebook changed the outcome of the election was a crazy idea. Calling that crazy was dismissive and I regret it.  This is too important an issue to be dismissive.”
It turns out, though, that was just Zuck lying to "dumb fucks", as he terms people who trusts him.  Last week, after Zuckerberg had a private meeting with Donald Trump, I discovered that Zuckerberg has decided to not just passively enable, but actively aid and abet, the spread of disinformation on his platformThis week, it turns out that that this is actually happening, and Facebook is perfectly OK with it.

I'm done.  When someone shows you who they are, believe them.  I believe Zuckerberg is exactly who he has shown himself to be, and that as long as he's in charge of decision making at his company, that extends to the company as well.

Goodbye, Facebook.  I can't say it's been fun, but it has been educational.

Addendum:  Just to be clear, this also, obviously, applies to working for Facebook.  I recently got this email from a recruiter, so here's my answer.
Hi John,
I hope you are doing well! I was hoping you'd be open to an “exploratory” conversation about potential opportunities. I recruit specifically for our Software Engineering teams and believe you could be a strong match for Facebook.
Per the above, I do not think I would be a good match for Facebook. 
As cliché as it may sound, we truly do seek innovative engineers who will come up with the next great idea for Facebook to help us connect the world.
Here are some ideas, which you can have for free:  Be responsible custodians of user data, be up front and honest with your users, and if you're going to accept paid ads, apply the same standards for political ads that you do for ads for laundry soap.
By design, we run very small teams. On average, there is about 1 engineer for every 1.25 million customers on Facebook. The company is growing rapidly, and our positions offer explosive growth opportunities.
 You might want to avoid "explosive" in your recruitment emails right now.
What does “exploratory” mean? Well, I’d like to talk to you about where you are in your career, what type of growth opportunities you are hoping for, and the type of development you're most passionate about.
I'm fairly happy in my career, passionate about working on things that help people, but especially passionate about not working on things that actively harm people.  Thus, I don't think I'd be a good match for Facebook right now.
Please let me know if you would have a few minutes to chat sometime this week or next.
Be sure to check out this Forbes article:
http://bit.ly/2cJ3wPe
http://newsroom.fb.com/news/
Best,
[REDACTED]


Comments

  1. It's also pretty annoying that Facebook is going to try to gaslight everybody about how and when they changed their (official) policy. I'm perfectly willing to believe they had this policy internally for a year, and just didn't tell anybody. And then, at some point, somebody realized they needed to clean things up before they were called out on it. Or maybe they are just horribly crappy at communicating their policies to users generally. Doesn't really matter, does it? They cannot be trusted.

    https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1183118298390683649?s=20

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The problem with creation date metadata in PDF documents

Last night Rachel Maddow talked about an apparently fake NSA document "leaked" to her organization.  There's a lot of info there, I suggest you listen to the whole thing:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/maddow-to-news-orgs-heads-up-for-hoaxes-985491523709

There's a lot to unpack there but it looks like somebody tried to fool MSNBC into running with a fake accusation based on faked NSA documents, apparently based on cloning the document the Intercept published back on 6/5/2017, which to all appearances was itself a real NSA document in PDF form.

I think the main thrust of this story is chilling and really important to get straight -- some person or persons unknown is sending forged PDFs to news organization(s), apparently trying to get them to run stories based on forged documents.  And I completely agree with Maddow that she was right to send up a "signal flare" to all the news organizations to look out for forgeries.  Really, really, really import…

Personal Web Discovery (aka Webfinger)

There's a particular discovery problem for open and distributed protocols such as OpenID, OAuth, Portable Contacts, Activity Streams, and OpenSocial.  It seems like a trivial problem, but it's one of the stumbling blocks that slows mass adoption.  We need to fix it.  So first, I'm going to name it:

The Personal Web Discovery Problem:  Given a person, how do I find out what services that person uses?
This does sound trivial, doesn't it?  And it is easy as long as you're service-centric; if you're building on top of social network X, there is no discovery problem, or at least only a trivial one that can be solved with proprietary APIs.  But what if you want to build on top of X,Y, and Z?  Well, you write code to make the user log in to each one so you can call those proprietary APIs... which means the user has to tell you their identity (and probably password) on each one... and the user has already clicked the Back button because this is complicated and annoying.

My faxed letter to both my Senators this morning

My faxed letter to both my Senators this morning.

Senators Grassley and Graham, this morning, engaged in an obvious act of witness intimidation. They leaked a letter to the Justice Department referring criminal prosecution against Mr. Steele for alleged but unspecified false statements to, apparently, the FBI.

This is on the heels of Senator Grassley refusing to release the testimony of Fusion GPS, refusing to allow the public to evaluate the claims of Simpson vs. selective and apparently inaccurate leaks of said information from the Republican members of the committee.

This is outrageous.

It is unacceptable. It is un-American. These Senators are trying to achieve in then court of public opinion what they have no chance of doing in a real court. They are themselves engaging in witness intimidation & obstruction of justice.

I call on you to denounce this desperate and illegal act by your colleagues and to introduce a motion to censure these two sitting Senators who have demeaned th…