Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Employees Are So Paranoid They're Using Burner Phones To Talk To Each Other (nymag.com)

Facebook's reputation has only continued to get more sullied in recent weeks, and it's taking a toll on employees. According to a new report, things over at the old FB are, well, kind of grim. From the report: "People now have burner phones to talk shit about the company -- not even to reporters, just to other employees," one former employee said. Another described the current scene as a "bunker mentality," meaning that after nearly two years of continuous bad press some people are, to borrow a phrase, leaning in as hard as they can to cope. "It's otherwise rational, sane people who're in Mark's orbit spouting full-blown anti-media rhetoric, saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook," said the former employee. Further reading: Facebook Employees Are Calling Former Colleagues To Look For Jobs Outside the Company and Asking About the Best Way To Leave.

224 comments

  1. MMMM... I miss myspace now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least myspace didn't know how to monetize... need to bring that back.. they still don't know how to monetize

  2. This article was sponsored by Google. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  3. The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This situation must be reminiscent of living in communist countries.

    Enjoy!

    1. Re:The Left by TWX · · Score: 2

      This situation must be reminiscent of living in communist countries.

      Enjoy!

      Just so we understand each other, you're saying that the paranoia among employees in literally one of the largest Capitalist companies in the world is like living in a Communist country?

      You do realize this sullies Capitalism even more than it does Communism, right? This implies that the power of the Corporation is so great that it rivals or even exceeds that of the nation-state...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re: The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I lived in communism and the paranoia etc including having public and private "face" in the book so to say were defo real

    3. Re:The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, most authoritarians fail to understand that the politic right is synonymous with authoritarianity. Sure there is some authoritarian tendencies on the left, but any reasonable person must conclude that there is no possible way to divorce the political right and authoritarianity. Even so called libertarians willingly admit that they vouch for a corporatocracy over anything else, and readily admit as well that all fascists go through a right-libertarian phase. They become fascists when they realize how authoritarian they are, and accept it instead of lying to themselves.

    4. Re: The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Found the Russian troll.

    5. Re:The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At this point, I'm getting to worry that the NSA or other national equivalents might sell the data they got on me to Google and Failbook.

    6. Re:The Left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This situation must be reminiscent of living in communist countries.

      Enjoy!

      In a communist country you'd be towing the majority line too, because you're a pathetic little asshole.

      Collaborators gonna collaborate.

  4. Paranoia? by PingSpike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're not paranoid if they're actually after you.

    1. Re:Paranoia? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The way you wrote it, if someone is after you then it negates your paranoia.

      The actual quote is:
      "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you." — Joseph Heller

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Paranoia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illustrated best in Bowfinger https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0131325/

    3. Re:Paranoia? by piojo · · Score: 1

      Does that actually negate the GP's point? Symptoms of paranoia aren't really indicative of paranoia if there is a demonstrable threat or attack. Joseph Heller was not writing as a doctor or serious philosopher.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    4. Re:Paranoia? by novakyu · · Score: 1

      I think it's a matter of cause-and-effect. If you act paranoid because someone is after you, you don't actually have paranoia. However, someone who does have clinical paranoia could have someone who is going after them (further reading: fallacy fallacy).

    5. Re:Paranoia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
      Zuck: Just ask
      Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
      [Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
      Zuck: People just submitted it.
      Zuck: I don't know why.
      Zuck: They "trust me"
      Zuck: Dumb fucks

    6. Re:Paranoia? by asylumx · · Score: 1

      Yes. The fact someone is after you does not affirm nor refute the fact you are paranoid. They are independent facts! Therefore, the original point is not accurate, because it implies a relationship that does not exist.

    7. Re:Paranoia? by shanen · · Score: 1

      I prefer the form "Even paranoids have real enemies."

      However I think this best summarizes my excessively mixed attitude towards Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/group... (The owner of the group should change the group number (default) to something like "FacebookHatersUsingFacebook".)

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    8. Re:Paranoia? by Falos · · Score: 1

      The only difference between paranoia and prudence is popularity.

      That's just my interpretation though, in catchy sound bite form.

    9. Re:Paranoia? by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      The actual quote is: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you." â" Joseph Heller

      They way I heard it...

      "When everyone is out to get you,

      Paranoid is just........good thinking!!"

      - Dr. Johnny Fever (WKRP)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    10. Re:Paranoia? by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Yes. The fact someone is after you does not affirm nor refute the fact you are paranoid. They are independent facts! Therefore, the original point is not accurate, because it implies a relationship that does not exist.

      They're dependent facts, and the relationship does exist by definition.

      When someone is "after you" it is no longer a delusion, and also not necessarily excessive or irrational to distrust them.

    11. Re:Paranoia? by RhettLivingston · · Score: 2

      This situation is a deeper example of what that usually implies. It is more than a case of just seeing those that are after you and knowing they are there. Having been a part of the conspiracy, these people know what they are up against.

      Their use of a burner may very well be driven by knowledge of the systems and tactics they've been involved in creating. That makes finding that they are using burners a confirmation of sorts of our fears of what those systems are capable of and have actually been used for.

    12. Re:Paranoia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if you're paranoid about something happening for imaginary reason A, and aren't aware of reason B that is actually the case? Paranoia might still be present, just like a broken clock can be broken even if it just happens to show the right time of day.

    13. Re:Paranoia? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      There's also this gem:

      "Of course I'm paranoid, everyone's trying to kill me!" - Weyoun (Star Trek: Deep Space 9)

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    14. Re:Paranoia? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      When someone is "after you" it is no longer a delusion...

      You're assuming that the paranoid person has valid evidence that someone is after them. In that case, yes, it isn't a paranoid delusion, it's a logical conclusion. "Has paranoid delusions" and "someone is after them" can be independent facts, i.e. the paranoid person has no specific evidence about the person that's after them.

    15. Re:Paranoia? by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that the paranoid person has valid evidence that someone is after them.

      Upthread: "Does that actually negate the GP's point? Symptoms of paranoia aren't really indicative of paranoia if there is a demonstrable threat or attack."

      "Has paranoid delusions" and "someone is after them" can be independent facts

      Upthread: "They are independent facts!"

      Can be != are.

      I'm not going to repeat every premise in the thread simply because people cannot be bothered to read for context.

    16. Re:Paranoia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You and the people who voted you up don't understand the definition of paranoia.

      Paranoia is the _irrational_ and persistent feeling that people are 'out to get you'.

      So yes, if it isn't irrational, it isn't paranoia.

      Posting AC because Mossad is after me.

    17. Re:Paranoia? by sfcat · · Score: 1

      This situation is a deeper example of what that usually implies. It is more than a case of just seeing those that are after you and knowing they are there. Having been a part of the conspiracy, these people know what they are up against.

      Their use of a burner may very well be driven by knowledge of the systems and tactics they've been involved in creating. That makes finding that they are using burners a confirmation of sorts of our fears of what those systems are capable of and have actually been used for.

      Posting to undo a mistake in moderating against this post...

      --
      "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
  5. Re:Gilets jaunes by Tailhook · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Russian trolls

    Yeah, it couldn't be just working people that don't like energy poverty. It's mindless Frenchmen doing the bidding of Russian trolls on Facebook.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  6. Glassdoor by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Glassdoor just updated their best companies to work for list and Facebook is in the top 10 based on employee feedback. Methinks someone is lying to Glassdoor about their experience at Facebook.

    1. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glassdoor just updated their best companies to work for list and Facebook is in the top 10 based on employee feedback. Methinks someone is lying to Glassdoor about their experience at Facebook.

      Maybe some Russian astroturfing outfit?

    2. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Alternatively, maybe journalists really are full of shit?

    3. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (sarcastic mode) Gee. That never happens on Glassdoor. (/sarcastic mode)
      I know of a company where they are forced to write good Glassdoor reviews. Another company offers bonuses for positive reviews.

    4. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow! Free dry cleaning and gym! that's about a $20 month value!!

      Pros

              "Great work-life balance (this depends on teams)" (in 100 reviews)

              "Amazing benefits for Full Time Employees including free food, stipends for gym memberships & free dry cleaning" (in 266 reviews)

      Cons

              "Some teams have poor work life balance" (in 292 reviews)

              "It's easy to end up working long hours" (in 67 reviews)

    5. Re:Glassdoor by slaughts · · Score: 2

      I have to agree. Maybe I am just becoming jaded in my later years, but when I see any 'Best Companies to Work For' list, I just assume it is the list of companies that gave the most money to the author/organization that published the list...

    6. Re:Glassdoor by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      I'd lay odds that the folks at facebook had posters and memos up telling employees to make them look good to glassdoor. I have worked for several companies that have asked their employees to "vote for us" for one industry bullshit award or another.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    7. Re:Glassdoor by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Glassdoor just updated their best companies to work for list and Facebook is in the top 10 based on employee feedback. Methinks someone is lying to Glassdoor about their experience at Facebook.

      That depends, can you tell who said what?

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    8. Re:Glassdoor by quintus_horatius · · Score: 1

      Both statements can be true, it all depends on where in the company you work.

      TFS makes it sounds like the article is about executives and managers, but that won't represent everyone in the company.

    9. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks someone is lying to Glassdoor about their experience at Facebook.

      Soviet Union was an utopia during Stalin rule. Nobody complained and every single person would tell you that they are happy beyond ecstatic about everything.

    10. Re: Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the company sent the link around to all of the employees and strongly encouraged everyone to vote.

    11. Re:Glassdoor by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      Alternatively, maybe journalists really are full of shit?

      Journolist, Gamejournopro's, and so on proves that collusion is true. Being full of shit and pushing an agenda is older then the Spanish-American war.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:Glassdoor by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I filled out an "anonymous" review of my company for Glassdoor. The information they tied to the review meant that I was the only person in the company who could have created the review. Fortunately, I like my employer so my review was positive.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    13. Re:Glassdoor by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If you worked for Facebook, the world's second largest spy agency, would you post on a web site that Facebook sucks?

    14. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there was a 'Like' button on your post, I'd click it.

    15. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alternately I think companies have been aware of Glassdoor for some time and jack with their numbers a little. It reminds me of looking at IMDB movie rankings, and all the cast and crew go on and give it 10/10!!! Greatest movie I've seen in my lifetime!!! I'm sure companies could muster upper executive ranks or just pay some outside company to load the Glassdoor ratings.

    16. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks that Facebook can buy Glassdoor with Mark's pocket change any given time and then comb through all the past reviews to see who wrote what, so no sane Facebook employee would be too critical there or anywhere else.

    17. Re:Glassdoor by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Or maybe Facebook just contributes enough to Glassdoor.

    18. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the gripping hand, perhaps Glassdoor's reviews are being submitted by people other than regular employees?

    19. Re:Glassdoor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook employee checking in here. Who the hell carries a second phone?

      Seriously, I... don't see anything significantly different at work from last year or the year before.

      We've got work to do. We're doing it. Wash, rinse, and repeat. ;-)

  7. Re:Gilets jaunes by stealth_finger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Russian trolls

    Yeah, it couldn't be just working people that don't like energy poverty. It's mindless Frenchmen doing the bidding of Russian trolls on Facebook.

    Are you trying to say people don't like it when tax breaks for the rich get loaded onto the everyman? Nah, it's gotta be them Russians.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  8. omg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't wait to share this on facebook.

  9. CENSORED by Ragnarok89 · · Score: 1
    I think that...

    shit, they might be reading this...

    I think that... æxêz8Û\îWámbÚêJ/fpZeæe8YúÃiàRûîrÜ0Iá'u—iÜwwöÈg4Ð?LëóØéaõë)-è X€¾ýðíÃ?|0L?áá/?4'~'~ÿë~êÑ??’Ëôíú1/øU/6)±$** (DÎäaÓ+faÌË/[Y’>ÑÓ6 \Ë'êUáX5GÛz’_éAA±EÖaÏNeb`õ €ÄdæÁuHÃZ?3AÅyYæN0èÔ2?jW@'èÒ'7Û{añ¥z vn½ðùq' ?—àÉ"f¼ft’/â]ô~gnÚ×À=]øGRôûkO=]uT9

    1. Re:CENSORED by Red_Forman · · Score: 1

      I agree with 4.84% of your comment. In order to comply with the new Australian laws, this comment was encoded with ROT26.

    2. Re:CENSORED by ZorinLynx · · Score: 0

      NO CARRIER
      OK

  10. Re: Gilets jaunes by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering the ammount of damage, targetted destruction, and graffiti left behind, it has absolutely nothing to do with labour, or taxation.

    Anarchists, extremists, and just plain old fashioned assholes always attach themselves to large protests because it gives them an excuse to break shit.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  11. How would anyone know? by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the point of using a burner phone is not to let people know, how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:How would anyone know? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Since the point of using a burner phone is not to let people know, how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

      Simple. Just load the Facebook app on the burner phones and ... Oh, wait.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:How would anyone know? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      Since the point of using a burner phone is not to let people know, how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

      By asking them? This isn't a physics experiment, it's an employee saying, "A bunch of coworkers told me they do this."

    3. Re:How would anyone know? by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      ...how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

      By a sudden increase in the quantity of cheap phones discovered in the garbage cans at FaceBook?

    4. Re:How would anyone know? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

      Be a Facebook employee. Have eyes and ears.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    5. Re:How would anyone know? by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Since the point of using a burner phone is not to let people know, how would anyone credibly be able to assess the widespread use of burner phones?

      By asking them? This isn't a physics experiment, it's an employee saying, "A bunch of coworkers told me they do this."

      First, assume a spherical burner phone.

  12. Do you know a FB employee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need to gather as much personal information about them as possible, and make it public on the internet.

    What's good for the goose etc. If they are going to ass-rape the privacy of the entire world, then they have abandoned their own right to any shed of privacy either.

    The internet didn't used to have these privacy raping companies on it. It's time to retake the net, or it'll be lost for good.

  13. Well, when you work for a shady company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While Facebook may not be doing anything illegal, I consider them to be one of the worst scumbag companies on earth! They exist only to profit from collecting and selling people's private data to advertisers! They will go to obscene lengths to collect information on people whether they are Facebook users or not!! They do not care at all about people, nor the damage that recent data breaches may do to people. Suckerberg is right up there with Traitor Trump and his criminal cronies, just as EVIL and corrupt!!!!

  14. Best Way To Leave? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Sorry, you don't ever leave Facebook...

    There's no way out of here
    When you come in
    You're in for good...

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re: Best Way To Leave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Just slip out the back, Jack
      Make a new plan, Stan
      You don't need to be coy, Roy
      Just get yourself free
      Hop on the bus, Gus
      You don't need to discuss much
      Just drop off the key, Lee
      And get yourself free...

    2. Re:Best Way To Leave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like the good old EU.

    3. Re:Best Way To Leave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the hotel California...

    4. Re:Best Way To Leave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can check-out any time you like
      But you can never leave.

  15. Remember: It's not just Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole world has gone nuts in that regard.

    It used to be only evil totalitarian states and comic book villains. (At least what we were aware of...)

    And now name me a single country or big corporation, that isn't on track, on the same level as, or worse than Stalin, regarding totalitarian surveillance and draconian freedom-destroying laws in the name of "security"/"safety". ... ... When the main indicator for how safe you actually are, is how free you can act and move without being repressed by draconian laws.

    Let's make Facebook the next bit of a slippery slope, that serves us, for a change.

    1. Re:Remember: It's not just Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      name me a single country or big corporation, that isn't on track, on the same level as, or worse than Stalin

      Worse than Stalin? Conservative estimates place his regime as killing 20 million people. While there's plenty of undesirable things going on, it's not the red terror, and you're a retard if you think it is.

    2. Re:Remember: It's not just Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Killing a person is not the worst thing you can do to them.

    3. Re:Remember: It's not just Facebook. by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Well, torturing their children in front of them isn't happening on a large scale either.

      If you don't like what's happening to you there's always scope for violence. That might get you killed but hey, you're the one claiming something's worse than being killed.

    4. Re:Remember: It's not just Facebook. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      name me a single country or big corporation, that isn't on track, on the same level as, or worse than Stalin

      Worse than Stalin? Conservative estimates place his regime as killing 20 million people. While there's plenty of undesirable things going on, it's not the red terror, and you're a retard if you think it is.

      8 billion people are currently dying under capitalism.

  16. Why can't they just use Facebook? ... oh yeah :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is a sad sad thing. Leave it.

  17. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the contrary. Assholes who just want to break shit attach themselves to protests, which are often partially-led or co-organized by Anarchists.

  18. People don't talk face to face anymore? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

    Summary makes it sound like they only talk to each other on phones...

    1. Re:People don't talk face to face anymore? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      At least some Facebook employees are convinced that Facebook spies on ambient sound using smartphone microphones, so they don't trust face to face either.

    2. Re:People don't talk face to face anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it easier to uninstall the shitty Facebook app?

  19. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no Russian troll here in France only an ancient schema: people protest against the government,
    the government do not want do step down so send few "black block" disguised as gilet jaunes to crush
    shops etc, wait some time and then with a certain consensus forcibly stop the protest because of that
    violence.

    People here that crush things are simply government backed guys, with perhaps external idiots.

  20. Both by Kohath · · Score: 5, Informative

    The media is being unfair to Facebook.

    Also, Facebook is terrible and Facebook has taken a very long series of actions that are arrogant and insular. Facebook keeps making big mistakes and Facebook shows no signs of changing what matters.

    It's not clear that Facebook even could change its most basic problems:
    - it encourages emotional unhealthiness
    - its business model is exploitative of Facebook users
    - and therefore Facebook is a magnet for trolls who want to exploit users
    - we don’t trust Facebook
    - we don't want to hear our friends parrot shit they saw on the news (because all it tells us is that our friends haven't learned that the news media is trolling them)

    1. Re:Both by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      The media is being unfair to Facebook.

      According to a certain political party, facebook IS the media now.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The media is being unfair to Facebook.

      I have followed media coverage of Facebook closely, and so far I have not read anything unfair. Facebook has continuously abused its position, and shows no sign that it even understands the complaints levied at it at a fundamental level. The battering it is getting currently in the press has been a long time coming, and is doing a lot of good to bring the problems to a wider audience who will hopefully take note and start considering their use of the platform more carefully.

    3. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to a certain political party, facebook IS the media now.

      Precisely. Facebook is the media NOW. This is why the OLD media have a special animosity against them for destroying their business. They feel it's payback time now and they will use any opportunity to smear Facebook by spreading rumors, half truths and outright lies. And boy! There are so many opportunities there!

    4. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet Facebook is completely voluntary service to use. Someone makes a choice to use facebook. You don't have to use Facebook. So its a retarded argument you are making.

    5. Re:Both by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Yet Facebook is completely voluntary service to use. Someone makes a choice to use facebook. You don't have to use Facebook. So its a retarded argument you are making.

      Lots of transactions start out as voluntary and end up being exploitive. Are you saying you don't understand that?

    6. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not when you agree to a contract or terms of service. Which every user of Facebook does.

    7. Re:Both by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Not when you agree to a contract or terms of service. Which every user of Facebook does.

      So you are saying you don't understand.

    8. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's fucking voluntary you don't have to use it. If you being abused get the fuck out. What don't you understand!

    9. Re:Both by Kohath · · Score: 1

      It's fucking voluntary you don't have to use it. If you being abused get the fuck out. What don't you understand!

      And what about all the time between when they start exploiting you and when you finally find out about it and leave?

    10. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what they can do what they want.

    11. Re:Both by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      You know what else is voluntary? A background check for applying for a job or airport TSA scanning. You most likely won't get the job, and for the TSA get felt up by the TSA at best.

    12. Re:Both by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Facebook maintain shadow profiles of people that aren't users. Those people didn't choose to use Facebook but are still fucked over by it.

      But that's fine, you go ahead and claim other people are making retarded arguments. I'll let self awareness reach you organically, I'm sure it'll get there eventually.

    13. Re:Both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. They're a corporation. The have rules to follow and can be held accountable by the government that legitimizes their corporate status. You don't understand how America works.

  21. Re:Gilets jaunes by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Interesting

    STILL with the "blame the foreigners" narrative? Jesus, it's amazing how useful that is to brush aside the real concerns of working class people. No, nobody can possibly be getting screwed by the system that was set up to screw people, it's gotta be those dirty foreigners who are doing this to us.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  22. s'app? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    If they were really paranoid, couldn't they just use Whatsapp? I hear that's secure.

    Oh wait...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:s'app? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      They're not trying to protect the info from the government. Just from a phone that has FB installed. Just gives you an indication of how hard it is to get the spying to stop, how deep they look at calls and SMS messages and GPS, etc.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:s'app? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      They're not trying to protect the info from the government. Just from a phone that has FB installed. Just gives you an indication of how hard it is to get the spying to stop, how deep they look at calls and SMS messages and GPS, etc.

      Whatsapp is owned by Facebook.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:s'app? by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      I know that. My point was they're not even using non-FB owned apps (e.g. Snapchat, Signal) to communicate. Because even using the same phone is giving FB too much information.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  23. They know better than we do by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We should take a huge hint from them. They know what goes on behind the scenes. Everything you say is archived - not because it's bad today. No, it will be stored and used against you later. It's a weapon. A new kind of weapon, and the Facebook employees know exactly what it's capable of. They're not being paranoid. Paranoia is an irrational fear.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:They know better than we do by asylumx · · Score: 1

      it will be stored and used against you later.

      Paranoia is an irrational fear.

      Can you please provide the evidence for the first statement that proves it is rational? Specifically, where Facebook stored data for the specific purpose of using it against someone later, and have proven that mal-intent by actually using it against someone later.

      It's not that there isn't possibly some justification for a rational fear in all this, but you're stating that they are storing it with the explicit reason of using it against their users in the future and while it's easy to see a case where they could use it against their users in the future but your paranoia comes in when you assume they will do it and you have provided no reason for the assumption.

    2. Re:They know better than we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Suppose ten years ago you wrote a post that "women have vaginas". At the time this was a statement of fact. Well, when you're up for that big promotion in a few years, someone competing with you can pull up that old content and have you fired for hate speech and take your spot.

    3. Re:They know better than we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using condoms when having sex with strangers doesn't mean you're convinced you WILL get STD otherwise. But using condoms without first making sure the other person has STD isn't "paranoid".

      Stop being a dense cunt under the guise of being intellectual.

    4. Re:They know better than we do by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. That's just tro... oh.
      https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/21...

    5. Re:They know better than we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use google ya' intellectual cabbage.

      First hit:

      Mr. Evans claimed that his encounter with Facebook’s investigation team led him to believe that chats he had with a journalist prior to his employment were accessed for an interrogation.

      Being lazy as justification for criticizing something you do not like is, at best, childish. Grow up.

    6. Re:They know better than we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people at Harvard have reason to be afraid.

      There's also this mess.

      Zuckerburg is not a man to be trusted. He's made offers before and his actions show no signs that he won't again. Paranoia? Not by a long shot. But congrats for being overly pedantic on word usage Grammar Nazi.

    7. Re:They know better than we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should take a huge hint from them. They know what goes on behind the scenes. Everything you say is archived - not because it's bad today. No, it will be stored and used against you later. It's a weapon. A new kind of weapon, and the Facebook employees know exactly what it's capable of. They're not being paranoid. Paranoia is an irrational fear.

      If I held the views that you do, I would also be shitting myself.

  24. Press is not ganging up on facebook... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    ... "It's otherwise rational, sane people who're in Mark's orbit spouting full-blown anti-media rhetoric, saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook, ...

    If facebook had not done the entirely stupid and irresponsible things that it looks as if they have done, I doubt if the press would be reporting about the deeds of facebook. Those people mentioned as being in Mark's orbit need to look at themselves for the cause of all the press attention.

    1. Re:Press is not ganging up on facebook... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once the media has the taste of blood in their mouth, they will nitpick, spotlight and blow out of proportion every little thing you've ever even thought about doing.

      Good, bad and even just THINKING about it will end up a story.

    2. Re:Press is not ganging up on facebook... by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      Funny that they were doing the entirely stupid and irresponsible things for years, but they didn't get any attention for it until the Cambridge Analytics "scandal". As soon as the media found out Facebook data was used by the orange man and not just the black man, they went insane...and the insanity hasn't stopped.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  25. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not that the people's concern is illegitimate. It's that the chaos is.

  26. BookFace has enough money by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    to set up Stingray interceptors within their corporate sites, if people want to get any more paranoid. You know, in the interests of national security...

  27. Re: Gilets jaunes by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    You're still logged in to your account. You forgot to post anonymously as you're spamming the comment thread with the same post. See here: https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  28. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also Russian trolls get attached
    It's like with Black lives matter: the Russians spot a legitimate wedge issue and flare up the internet using it, with real life destabilizing consequences...
    Check out the explanation here.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/opinion/russia-meddling-disinformation-fake-news-elections.html

  29. Maybe there’s something to that idea by toppingtop · · Score: 2

    Employees also referenced Dara Khosrowshahi, the current CEO of Uber who was brought in to take over for Travis Kalanick and clean up his mess. The suggestion here is that bringing in somebody new, somebody who isn’t Mark Zuckerberg or Sheryl Sandberg, could help fix Facebook. This, of course, seems highly unlikely and, as loyalty to leadership at Facebook runs deep.

  30. Burner phones! YAY!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jack Bauer and I share the same preference...

  31. Re: Gilets jaunes by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1, Troll

    Media likes to stir the pot every bit as much as the Russians, and probably conspire (or at least are complicit) with the Russians to stir the shit for ratings. Pretending only one side benefits is why this shit isn't going to end any time soon.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  32. Just walk away by sdinfoserv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jeez people, if a job is that bad, leave. Staying is just as much a choice as leaving. I've left jobs I hated and taken pay cuts and never looked back. Peace of mind has a definite value. Surprise ending: if you really enjoy what your doing, you'll be good and make more in the end.

    1. Re:Just walk away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So much this. Your sanity and long term health is NOT worth any amount of money.
      The biggest reasons for premature health issues outside of crappy diet is crappy job environment.
      Even if you yourself think you aren't stressed, you actually are. You just don't know it.
      Well, unless you get off on watching others suffer, that is.
      Subconscious stress is a literal killer. It's made people nosedive out windows or shoot their boss.
      It's just as bad as not realizing your own depression and dealing with it. One day it spirals out of control and you're drinking yourself to death or worse.
      The scary thing is it can hit just like the snap of a finger. Anything can trigger it to bubble to the surface. Trivial, dumb things.

      Na, fuck that noise. Take the pay cut, you'll find elsewhere to go some time.
      And if not, take up a secondary side job based on some hobby. It's never been easier to sell to global markets.
      Find a niche and capitalize on it.
      If you have no hobbies, pick one and experiment from there.
      Pick a thing a month and just go with it. (or two months if you are particularly busy with family commitments)
      You'll have to be one super mega ultra boring fucker if you can't find something in that list that is enjoyable, never mind the greater "list" of hobbies not covered by this basic list. Literally anything, even making music from tapping on your body to exotic shitposting in sculpture form. (gluing a bunch of random crap together and giving it some bullshit story / theme, instant quadrillionaire, congrats.)
      Even if it is delivering for a local food place for a few hours at night. These places are usually always in demand.
      Delivery in general, actually. Sometimes places don't deliver where they could benefit, asking around can't hurt. Or maybe they don't have an online portal and you are handy with wordpress, or actually can do web-dev and make a custom site from scratch.
      There's loads of things you can do these days on the side that aren't too demanding. That is as long as you don't take on said super demanding jobs! It is not the best idea for a side job.
      Preferably find something to do that isn't exactly the same as your main job. No way, don't want to do that. That leads to fatigue.

      In my case, I program and also do art, graphics design, electronics, web-dev, looking in to some game-dev with 2 friends, 3D modelling and others. I just pick things from a trivially simple script based on weighted values and my general mood. Art / graphics is usually one I do all the time throughout a set period since it is both relaxing and creative, and as a bonus can also get you some money if you put some basic planning in to it.
      Admittedly I do some programming in some of my side jobs, but I also really like programming, plus it is more relaxed in most of them.
      The full-on games-dev with the 3 of us will be very heavy in terms of programming. But I also know how to cut down dev time considerably with procedural generation in the development stages.
      The development time to make said tools is still usually much less than doing the whole project manually. Most of the time, at least.
      What usually does take longer is if your game itself uses realtime procedural generation during the gameplay. That requires incredibly stricter constraints, trial and error and experimentation. Shitting out a mess in development can be tidied up (and is usually beneficial if environment geometry), shitting out a mess mid-game... that's a negative rating on Steam right there!
      I look forward to it. 7 months later, 2 less friends. Send pre-help.

    2. Re:Just walk away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But see that's just part of the myth of why right-to-work is so great. Most people can't just change jobs at will. Most people spend nearly every penny they make and can't afford a pay cut. People can't easily do things like relocate because they have spouses with jobs and kids in school and other responsibilities that make it hard for them to leave their current area.

      Now sure, maybe a lot of that is due to poor choices by people, i.e., not mindfully leaving below your means so that you always have savings/buffer, but it doesn't change the reality that many people are stuck in jobs. And even as someone who does live below his means by design, and makes great money to boot, I can tell you that taking a substantial pay cut would be a big hurt.

    3. Re:Just walk away by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 1

      Step back and visualize the cyclic filtering nature of it.

      1) N employees join an organization.
      2) Organization is bad in some way.
      3) Strong willed, hireable types leave.
      4) Repeat until only those afraid to leave are left

      --
      Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    4. Re:Just walk away by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      What happened to:

      5)??
      6)Profit

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re:Just walk away by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Most people spend nearly every penny they make and can't afford a pay cut.

      While earning the sort of money Facebook pays? Fuck them then, they should've planned better and lived within their means.

    6. Re:Just walk away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad you've got so much money laying around that you can throw a great paying job in SV away. Also, learn to fucking spell.

  33. Re:Why can't they just use Facebook? ... oh yeah : by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

    Delete your facebook.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  34. One or the other by magarity · · Score: 1

    "loyalty to leadership at Facebook runs deep" vs "People now have burner phones to talk shit about the company"

    Which is it???

  35. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just don't want to be paying absurd levels of taxes period. Most couldn't care less about how much money that far away strangers have.

  36. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Are you trying to say people don't like it when tax breaks for the rich get loaded onto the everyman? Nah, it's gotta be them Russians.

    It can be both.

  37. Re: Gilets jaunes by schure · · Score: 0

    My bad. Sincere apologies. Any way to repair the damage?

  38. But.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The press is ganging up on Facebook. I've never particularly like Facebook so much so I don't have an account. Facebook's creepy stalking nature has been known for a while now (precisely why I didn't have an account even five years ago). Its only recently that Facebook has been getting bad media attention because they upset the wrong people. Where was all the media attention on Facebook before they helped Trump, back when they were helping Obama? Certain people are upset about Trump winning and they believe Facebook is to blame so now its hit piece after hit piece. Facebook and Mark have always been shitty and scandalous. If the mainstream media had any credibility left they would have been targeting Facebook before people got suckered in to giving them all their data.

    1. Re:But.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where was all the media attention on Facebook before they helped Trump, back when they were helping Obama?

      Same place that concern over dealings with Saudi Arabia, Russia and China were.

      Certain people are upset about Trump winning and they believe Facebook is to blame so now its hit piece after hit piece.

      You've got that reversed. Mewling plebs think Trump won because they've been told Facebook is to blame. Why? Because Chucklezuck is a bitch. He served his purpose, and he's serving another now, by being sacrificed to the mob. Not that it couldn't happen to a nicer robot, of course.

      If the mainstream media had any credibility left

      It never had any credibility to begin with. Remember the Maine.

  39. Re:Gilets jaunes by Rockoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These arent tax breaks targeted at the rich. These are taxes targeted at the rural and suburban populations.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  40. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elite thinks working peoples are too dumb to rise up on their own. That's why they push so hard to squeeze these peoples, and drive them like slaves.

  41. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  42. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's less contrary and more corollary.

  43. Re: Fuck Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck those fucking fucks! What you said. Zuckerberg should be raped with a rusty screwdriver

  44. Here's why I still use Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I can message any friend I have with ease.

    I can follow events at establishment that I enjoy if they are smart enough to actually use the Facebook event mechanism. Some put posts up saying they have an event but no actual event.

    My friends see events I might attend and occasionally ask me if I'm going. So it helps me have actual face to face time with friends.

    The event recommendations are actually decent. Their algorithm tens to see that you like ABC and other similar events (like ABC) appear in your feed.

    People/companies that know how to use the invite system make events and send me invites. The invites are not obtrusive at all.

    Facebook. Start monetizing the event system! And frankly, you need to send every company correspondence telling them THIS IS HOW TO USE EVENTS! Because quite frankly I enjoy events. And quite frankly I'd say only 20% of companies use them properly. I can't even find a god damned happy hour or trivia night. Well, every bar should have trivia night as a recurring weekly event and I should be able to find many of them. Instead I have to find this crap through looking at each companies web site or if I'm lucky they might have an image burried among their 100+ images that says what their weekly events are.

    1. Re:Here's why I still use Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've given up on using Facebook as a means of passively seeing what friends are up to, because their news feed system is trash. But for messaging and finding events it's become very useful to me.

    2. Re:Here's why I still use Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feel the need for an invitation? Most 12-YO do! Feckin-A lil' byte-gaffot Bosco ... a drooling, lisping, slabbering Trotsky-slut infant, pimping FBs blo-jobbing and chattering aimless like a wind-blown leaf.

    3. Re:Here's why I still use Facebook by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      I can message any friend I have with ease.

      Friends don't let friends Facebook.

    4. Re:Here's why I still use Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FB does make money off the events. They make money off everything. Your statement illustrates that you do not know how FB makes money, and that's why people are so upset with them. Either you're being paid to shill or you're willfully ignorant of their business practices. Which is it?

    5. Re: Here's why I still use Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kid, before this FB crap we used to talk to people (phone, in person, socially etc) where weâ(TM)d make plans to go âoedo stuffâ or even spontaneously do stuff. Horizons would broaden, more actual friends be made. You do not need events for facilitating this.

  45. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that's how democratic parties (which has nothing to do with democracy) think.

  46. Re:Gilets jaunes by OakDragon · · Score: 1

    I can accept that there are some number of Russian trolls on Facebook doing what the OP says... not saying I *do* accept it, just that it's not unreasonable. But even if true, I also can accept that they have pretty much zero impact in the grand scheme.

  47. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could be the machine from future trying to destabilize humanity. It could be China. It could be aliens. "Could be" is not prove.

  48. End-game for Zuckerbook by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    It's been coming for the last few years, but The End is finally here for Facebook; everyone is now seeing what the true nature of the beast is, and it's ugly as sin. Time for you to all abandon ship just like the employees are. Formulate your own Facebook Exit Strategy and get off it now. Helping kill Facebook is probably the kindest thing you can do for everyone who is either still ignorant of how bad it is, is in denial about it, or just still sitting on the fence. Time for people to start being actually social, instead of social-media-fake-social.

  49. I can see that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they know the inner working of "social media", they surely know the extent of social surveillance.
    And I see nothing wrong in using burner phone "just in case", it's an added security.

  50. The truth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump told you so.

    P.S. Delete your Facebook account, I did at the start of this year and have not missed it one bit.

    1. Re:The truth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      9 years clean. Nope, still don't miss it.

  51. No they're not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The media is being unfair to Facebook

    The media from what I've seen is just reporting on what facebook has done, what facebook has admitted to and pointing out facebook's lies.

    How is that unfair?

  52. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Considering the ammount of damage, targetted destruction, and graffiti left behind, it has absolutely nothing to do with labour, or taxation.

    Anarchists, extremists, and just plain old fashioned assholes always attach themselves to large protests because it gives them an excuse to break shit.

    They didn't do that with the tea party protests. Why's that?

  53. Fixing Mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, Facebook is terrible and Facebook has taken a very long series of actions that are arrogant and insular. Facebook keeps making big mistakes and Facebook shows no signs of changing what matters.

    True on some levels (E.g. Facebook optimizes for used interaction, even at the expense of user experience. It is basically stuck optimizing for local minima that will cost it users. Most telling point: when you pick up your phone, Facebook waits a tiny bit of time and then gives you a notification for some random thing, rather than giving you the notification *when the thing happens* and not issuing notifications for stuff you probably don't care about.)

    OTOH, they do make improvements from the user perspective too. They locked down users' friends info from developers a few years ago, for example. They didn't go far enough--NOBODY should be allowed to make you sign in through facebook to take a random internet quiz, that should just be against Facebook policy--but they made progress.

  54. Re: "who're" in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The overuse of contractions like this is downright obnoxious. "Who are" and "who're" (if that is even a contraction!) are both disyllabic and require the same amount of effort to say. Is this just a failure at trying to look lazy?

    Parent brought up a good point...

  55. The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by timholman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "It's otherwise rational, sane people who're in Mark's orbit spouting full-blown anti-media rhetoric, saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook," said the former employee.

    In a very real sense, that is true. The media have been in a continuous uproar since the 2016 Presidential election and the Brexit vote, because the "wrong side" won, and Facebook is a very convenient target for part of the blame. It's not as if Facebook's business model was any different before 2016; the company has always had slimy business practices. The media simply gave Facebook a free pass up to that point.

    It must be enormously frustrating to Zuckerberg and Sandberg to fight this battle, because their political leanings are no doubt on the progressive side, and Facebook fundamentally did nothing different in 2016 than it did in 2012. They can't comprehend why they're suddenly the bad guys. It's just that in the modern world of social media (which they helped to create), when the mob goes hunting for witches, someone has to be thrown on the pyre.

    1. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fire was lit as soon as the term "social media" was penned. It just took several years for that campfire to become a raging forest fire. Now Facebook is the poster child of what is wrong.

    2. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by Tailhook · · Score: 2

      The media simply gave Facebook a free pass up to that point.

      If only. Facebook was a media darling many times. When Musk was threatening to fire anyone that dared cross out Black Lives Matter on the "signature wall" there was no end of praise for the oh so virtuous Facebook. When Facebook was grooming supposedly "conservative" stories out of their news feed an amazing phenomena occurred: a groundswell of admiration for corporate sovereignty and the sanctity of private prerogatives.

      Zuckerberg could do himself a lot of good by ginning up more SJW red meat. Go on a anti-"hate" jihad and accelerate banning "racists." Someone "deadnames" a celebrity? (Barry for Obama, Bruce for Caitlyn, etc.) Ban them; that's hostility and they need to go! Show us your virtue! Do it with great fanfare and get all your pink and purple hairs wet for you again. Hell, at least tweet more mean things about Trump. What is so hard about that? Block Russia. Announce your love of democracy and what measures you're taking to "save" it from Russian democracy wreckers. Block the whole damn country in the name of democracy.

      There are so many things he could do to help get these media people off his back...

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    3. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I see it more as a case of yes you are right, FB has been doing things this way a while. Nothing new. But now some lights have been shined on their behavior and the unacceptable parts of it are on display.

      The attention is not because suddenly they are doing worse things. It's because suddenly people are paying attention.

      --
      Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    4. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      The question is, "When did people start paying attention?"

      The media started paying attention when they found out that average people could communicate to an audience whose size rivaled theirs. They took notice when an average "Joe the Plumber" could expose and then decompose their narrative and spin. The media started paying attention when their power was threatened.

      At that point, Facebook had to go.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess I have a harder time getting into full on tinfoil hat mode over it.

      I think the public had a building irritation with FB's policies.
      It boiled over when the recent issues since the election started to surface
      Media companies see people clicking on FB stories because if pre-existing irritation
      Media companies make money.

      I find that far more likely than an over arching conspiracy

      --
      Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    6. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media simply gave Facebook a free pass up to that point.

      If only. Facebook was a media darling many times. When Musk was threatening to fire anyone that dared cross out Black Lives Matter on the "signature wall" there was no end of praise for the oh so virtuous Facebook. When Facebook was grooming supposedly "conservative" stories out of their news feed an amazing phenomena occurred: a groundswell of admiration for corporate sovereignty and the sanctity of private prerogatives.

      Zuckerberg could do himself a lot of good by ginning up more SJW red meat. Go on a anti-"hate" jihad and accelerate banning "racists." Someone "deadnames" a celebrity? (Barry for Obama, Bruce for Caitlyn, etc.) Ban them; that's hostility and they need to go! Show us your virtue! Do it with great fanfare and get all your pink and purple hairs wet for you again. Hell, at least tweet more mean things about Trump. What is so hard about that? Block Russia. Announce your love of democracy and what measures you're taking to "save" it from Russian democracy wreckers. Block the whole damn country in the name of democracy.

      There are so many things he could do to help get these media people off his back...

      Your comment is too long and linguistically complex for basically the entire target demographic it's aimed at.

      I mean a 3 line block of text? What the fuck were you thinking?

      P.S. You confused Mark Zuckerberg with Elon Musk, which is strange because there is no way you're not a little Bazinga shitcock.

    7. Re:The press -is- ganging up on Facebook by noodler · · Score: 1

      "The media have been in a continuous uproar since the 2016 Presidential election and the Brexit vote, because the "wrong side" won, and Facebook is a very convenient target for part of the blame."

      This is not it.
      The real problem is that the facebook transduced fake news manipulation has become extremely political at around that time.
      Facebook (well, other platforms as well) is used by various actors to manipulate public thought.
      And facebook likes it.
      I think this is the problem with facebook. They are willing to let whole countries become politically unstable if it makes them profit. Disruptive, but not in a healthy way.

  56. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Russian trolls" is the new online "Racist!" It's a meaningless term that is used to indicate that the person doesn't agree with you.

    Once upon a time, the words had a real meaning, but in this age, I literally can't.

  57. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  58. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trotsky-slut progressives at FANGS are reaping the thought-crime mentality rewards they have so diligently sown. Could not happen to a nicer nest of hissing/spitting/rattling DemoRat vipers.

  59. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elite thinks working peoples are too dumb to rise up on their own. That's why they push so hard to squeeze these peoples, and drive them like slaves.

    You're giving people way too much credit. Nobody thinks that hard about anything. They just do whatever the hell they want.

    It's when people push back violently that they start to think.

  60. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope the problem is wage stagnation and also what the taxes are used for. The tax cuts, tax credits go to the 0.1% or 1% and meanwhile the people have seen how tribunals have closed, hospitals have closed or are deteriorating and so on among more things that are public, and they know it will get worse (European Union always wants more). e.g., the State will sell more jewels, or will mount an attack on healthcare by slowly defunding it.
    The government could have succeeded somewhat in this or well, delayed the inevitable but they presented the tax bill to the bottom 80% of the population. We're talking min wage workers commuting to their job, etc.
    It's also "for the environment" i.e. if you drive to work, or to the post office because the old one closed down you might as well be clubbing baby seals. That is plainly insulting and avoids solving anything.

  61. Re:Thanks Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up and buy the dip.

  62. Re:"who're" in summary by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    Boiling AIDS infested Lipton tea produces Lipton tea.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  63. Re: "who're" in summary by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    You need parental controls.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  64. multiple apology digging motion by epine · · Score: 1

    Why Zuckerbergâ(TM)s 14-Year Apology Tour Hasnâ(TM)t Fixed Facebook — April 2018

    The Apology API is known to be of limited ultimate effect when called in a continuous digging motion.

    The bunker is real, and it's spectacular.

  65. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russians are having a fun job with their evil and pernicious propaganda. Have a look at one of their latest articles (SFW) :

    https://www.rt.com/news/445756-kazakh-lara-croft-kadurov/

  66. Re:Gilets jaunes by Kohath · · Score: 3, Funny

    Russians weigh the same as a duck

  67. Best way to leave? Professionally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whenever possible, leave professionally. Give notice, but be prepared to be escorted out the door. Don't take what doesn't belong to you. Don't burn bridges. If giving your old company the real reason you are leaving will help them without hurting you or anyone else, do it, otherwise keep your peace.

    There are times you can't do this. If you are leaving because of others' bad behavior, you may have ethical or legal obligations to report it to higher-ups, the police, or others, even if it means burning bridges. But if you are just leaving since your job is frustrating or no longer fun, just leave quietly.

    1. Re:Best way to leave? Professionally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, after 18 years of teaching IT technology to high school students I threw in the towel quietly. No child left behind and its testing culture have completely ruined an entire generation of people, with more to come. Blaming teachers for this abomination was the last straw for me. Turned in my resignation, left quietly. Teachers are regarded as a nuisance in today's education, no point in trying to offer advice on my way out.

  68. Just die off already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook can't die off quick enough. It's a plaque on society.

  69. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyman? What's with the jellow jackets then? What's with the spraying that French everymen are disgusted by?

  70. Stop being dickish. by Pascoea · · Score: 1

    saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook

    Stop being a dick, maybe? Sometimes the bully deserves to get their ass kicked.

  71. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geez, it is like they do not understand the concept of a double edged sword. It should only get worse as they continue to eat their own.

  72. Ladies, please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's entirely possibly that Facebook is a shitty place to work AND journalists are lying scumbags!

    It doesn't have to be "either/or"...

  73. Right on! Phuque Fb! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope every inch of Facebook is thoroughly searched, investigated, and made public.
        I was wise enough to avoid Facebook totally, including removing every vestige of it from my phone immediately when I have to get a new one. I've kept as much of my personal info to myself, unless it's a case where I really need to share something. I can't imagine being dumb enough to have shared myself, and in doing so sharing substantial info on my friends, with Fb.
                                                                                                            Fuck 'em!

  74. Re: "who're" in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Agreed that the overuse of contractions is annoying, but you are wrong about one thing: "who're" is a monosyllable.

  75. Re: Gilets jaunes by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    The problem was that the Russians didn't care which way it swirled, and used a random back and forth motion. The media in America only wants it to swirl to the left.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  76. Re:Thanks Trump by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    Haha! Doing that. Changed jobs. Roll the 401K over. Check is in the mail during the dip.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  77. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who wants to hang out with granma and grandpa? Those fuckers might break a hip.

  78. That's not paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First, because lots of people are after them, second, the watched 'The Wire' and Zuck is obviously Stringer Bell.

  79. Re:"who're" in summary by zwarte+piet · · Score: 1

    Nooo, not Lipton........ aaarg :O

  80. So who has the best burner phones? by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    Asking for a friend.

  81. We know by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    We already correlated your location with your burner phone. And then ran facial recognition to confirm it was you.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  82. Re: Gilets jaunes by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Who wants to hang out with granma and grandpa? Those fuckers might break a hip.

    I know that the snowflakes have a reputation for being fragile, but I don't think they're THAT fragile ...

  83. That’s deliberate selective quoting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    , regarding totalitarian surveillance and draconian freedom-destroying laws in the name of "security"/"safety"

    How utterly convenient for your "argument", to leave out the essential conditional rest of the statement.

  84. They know the tracking by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    power of the tech they worked on.
    Did they chat with their friends doing voice recognition for ads?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  85. "People now have burner phones to talk... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "... shit about the company -- not even to reporters, just to other employees,"

    Hmm... sounds just like what other criminal organizations do, eh?

  86. Aww... poor FaceFuckers... by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 1

    What is that? FaceFuck employees are unhappy?

    GOOD. FUCK ‘EM. Fuck them right in the fucking Face....Book.

    Facebook, a long time ago, made my list of companies I cannot WAIT to watch go under.

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
  87. Facebook app by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

    When you choose your burner, be very careful it doesn't have the Facebook app preinstalled.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  88. Media against FB by turbotalon · · Score: 1

    It seems entirely plausible and rational to think the media IS in fact 'out to get' Facebook. After all, the media, for the most part, is all about ad money, and Facebook is siphoning off traditional media's ad money by the billions. It could be argued it's irrational to think the media ISN'T out to get FB.

    --

    I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy

  89. Deal, change or leave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whomever is using burners to "bitch about FB", they need to STFU and deal, attempt to change, or leave.

    If they've already got options in the money, then why the f are they there?

    I get that it's likely impossible to change stuff

    So for those in the money, they're staying why? And for those not in the money, they're waiting around, in a FML kinda way, till they get in the money?

  90. Re:Gilets jaunes by Can'tNot · · Score: 1

    Your comment is irrational, it is possible for more than one thing to be happening in the world at any given time. It is possible for some foreigners to provoke and encourage bigotry while, simultaneously, other foreigners are the subject of bigotry. That can happen. It's not a contradiction.

  91. Re: "who're" in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You say "hoor", like an old italian-american lady referring to a pretty woman she doesn't like ?

    I pronounce it as "hoo-er". You might have stumbled on differences in regional dialect. I do pronounce "who're" as a single two syllable word rather than two distinct words, so I think that at least backs up your original point in spirit.

  92. Re: Gilets jaunes by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    There's always a violent group willing and able to join any available protest.

  93. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to anything close to what your narrative claims. The Democrats find it convenient in order to avoid any introspection and maybe justify stealing power they were not given.

  94. Re:Gilets jaunes by wyHunter · · Score: 1

    That's because to these European "Agenda 21ers," for lack of a better word, want to force everyone into huge urban constellations - people are easier to control if they can be spied on continuously, and it's easy to do that in a city.

  95. Hypocrisy alert [in flashing neon] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These people who work in one of the planet's most intrusive and evil spying outfits are paranoid that somebody might see or hear THEIR communications?

    If that right there does not convince you to get off of Facebook, you are a complete and utter moron.

    "Social Networks" are the exact opposite of what their name implies - they encourage people to have "friends" they have never even met, to value the opinions of people who have never met them, and to prefer electronic communication with strangers over direct social contacts with friends and family.

    1. Re:Hypocrisy alert [in flashing neon] by ennis99 · · Score: 1

      "I do not see the relationship between what is happening in France and the Russian? Must stop putting them everywhere" https://www.minimilitia.mobi/ https://www.applock.ooo/ https://www.7zip.vip/

  96. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go away robot sheep

  97. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You were never like this before 2016. It's almost like a completely different person is hiding behind your low UID.

    How much did a Russian troll pay for your account? All your posts these days are whataboutism and misdirections, and you constantly protect the GOP and Russian interests while attacking anything they oppose.

    Slashdot has a well known problem with Russian trolls hijacking old accounts and clearly you're one of them.

  98. Re:Gilets jaunes by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    The whole "blame the foreigners" narrative is the weapon of first resort of those who despise the working class and wish them harm. It is used frequently to dismiss their legitimate concerns by claiming they are not genuine but dirty foreigners in disguise. One can see why it's popular, no arguments need be made, it's very easy to do.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  99. Re: "who're" in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You save a character

  100. Re:Gilets jaunes by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    something something needs of the many

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  101. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can be all of those...

  102. Re: "who're" in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome to the Twitterfication of the English language

  103. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    something something needs of the many

    Roman's lord and savior tells him it is OK to shit all over the needs of the many. If they can't pull themselves up by their own bootstraps then he sees them as ripe for exploitation and worthy of nothing more.

  104. Re:Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Though the inverse - sacrificing the needs and lives of many to retain the lifestyles and benefits of the few - is something you are all in favor of. And if the leader of your cult should ever fall ill I'm sure we'll see you calling for lesser men to find what organs they can donate to him to sustain his life.

  105. Re: Gilets jaunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey bro - how's the slumlord business going? Did you ever do anything about that bug infestation?