zlacker

>>giulio+(OP)
I wonder how people continue to work at Facebook. I know they tend to have the highest salaries from the FAANG groups, but still. We, as engineers and builders, have the responsibility to think critically about how the things we are working on will be used.

>>inambe+Lv
I wonder how people can continue to post questions like this to HN, when there are billions of people who happily use Facebook. I would think it's our responsibility to look outside of our narrow information bubble.

>>stickf+Fz
If the original claim is that 'facebook is damaging to (and beyond) its users', then the response 'but it has _many_ users' isn't much of a defense..

>>hhmc+jM
I think the original claim is that "facebook is damaging to some users". You could say the same about salt. People still work in salt mines.

>>stickf+OT
I'm not really able to wrap my head around your argument.

If it's damaging to some percentage of users, having more users means it damages more people.

Is your argument that this is okay because some people also put their health at risk being salt miners?

>>ziddoa+7i1
Can you name something that is not damaging to someone? Excessive salt consumption is linked over a million annual deaths worldwide. Even water kills thousands of people per year (drowning).

If your rule is "we can't have things that may hurt some people" then you're going to live in a pretty bland world. Gonna be especially tough without water.

>>stickf+lK1
>Excessive salt consumption is linked over a million annual deaths worldwide. Even water kills thousands of people per year (drowning)

And we have people and organizations that try to reduce the amount of deaths from those things. Raising awareness, passing laws, etc.

>If your rule is "we can't have things that may hurt some people" then you're going to live in a pretty bland world.

I only asked for clarification on your argument. But, no, that's not my "rule". I just think that if we can reduce harm, it's nice to do that where possible.

>Gonna be especially tough without water.

Come on. Your whole last sentence is ridiculous. The poster questioned why someone would work at Facebook. That is not the equivalent of saying "we can't have things that may hurt some people" and it's so far removed from your water/drowning scenario that I can't tell if you're being serious.