There was a response here (sadly since deleted), that said something to the effect,

>What makes you think this was designed as tracking system rather than anti-abuse feature?

Which goes to the crux of the problem: the way "online abuse" is defined presently, it enables platforms to introduce virtually any measures in the name of preventing abuse[1], and people gobble that up, heck, even cheer for it. "Think of the children" got an internet-era make-over, and it seems to be working.

--

[1] off of the top of my head: requiring real names & verifying them via governmental ID; automatic take-downs upon automated requests from 3rd party; automated limiting of posts' reach based on language analysis; requiring posting under your own login; pervasive tracking that jeopardizes people under repressive governmetns.

Requiring a government ID? How does this increase privacy? Doesn't this increase identity fraud? The value of government ids will skyrocket.

It's also awful for trans people, who often go by a different name or have an alternate account until the frustrating legal name change process goes through.

can confirm, currently maintaining presence and interaction on two accounts for each of facebook, twitter, and instagram, in order to not out myself to family and prospective employers

If you live and work in the US, the substantial part of your taxes is spent on invading other countries, killing innocent people and propping up dictators.

> how do you approach that morally? I really want to know the opinion of someone actually working there.

I can vote for the people (at every level) that I think will spend the taxes I am legally obligated to pay in a way I agree with and I can follow up with successively vociferous concerns (letters < community organization < protest, etc), but at a certain point my freedom (or life) can be threatened.

Employers can’t (yet) do the same. I’m under no obligation to them to do what I morally disagree with because I can always quit playing their game.

All I can do to quit my country is uproot from everything I’ve ever known, including my family, to another country that I agree with more that will also let me in.

They’re completely different situations and I’m pretty sure we all recognize that, but I’ll add my own personal anecdotes:

Employer

I don’t like the idea of software patents or generic business patents that can be summed up with “... do it on a computer”. I created some really awesome things for an employer many moons ago that were essentially revolutionizing how people in this very particular niche could more efficiently do their jobs. What did I really do though? I put together some open source tools completely foreign to this niche, glued them together with some nifty ideas and code that I wrote, put a decent unified UI on it, and packaged it up as a virtual machine appliance for our people in the field. My company wanted me to sign the invention away so they could patent it, and were going to put in 5 different applications. It was sign on the dotted line or walk, I walked at significant financial penalty.

Government

My dad’s from Libya. I lived there for a while growing up, and all my dad’s family is still in Tripoli. They all hated Gadaffi, and with the Arab spring uprising- things were getting bad. I joined in some protests across the US asking for intervention. Welp, we got what we asked for but not what we wanted. Turns out governments and geopolitics are tricky.

Whatever country I live in, I certainly didn't choose to be born there, and moving to another country is often more expensive than is possible for most people. I don't see how this compares to actively seeking a job at Facebook. I also don't think that the US doing bad things is an excuse for Facebook to do bad things.

The question was "how does it feel?". Not a really useful or interesting question, but there it is, at the top, and for a lot of people here, the answer is "exactly like what you're doing".

> See what gross inconsistency is tolerated. I have heard some of my townsmen say, “I should like to have them order me out to help put down an insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico;—see if I would go”; and yet these very men have each, directly by their allegiance, and so indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished a substitute. The soldier is applauded who refuses to serve in an unjust war by those who do not refuse to sustain the unjust government which makes the war; is applauded by those whose own act and authority he disregards and sets at naught; as if the state were penitent to that degree that it differed one to scourge it while it sinned, but not to that degree that it left off sinning for a moment. Thus, under the name of Order and Civil Government, we are all made at last to pay homage to and support our own meanness. After the first blush of sin comes its indifference; and from immoral it becomes, as it were, unmoral, and not quite unnecessary to that life which we have made.

-- Henry David Thoreau

Recently there was a number of articles like [1], saying that a a lot of good engineers stays away from working for FB, having misgivings about its practices.

So maybe people who agree to do such things are a result of a (long) selection process.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/may/17/facebook-...

That would make sense, the reason they have to pay so much is because the work is sketchy, if this was truly rewarding engineering work the market would see falling salaries. Doctors still want to be doctors even if they are paid less. You have to pay me 5x to do shitty work.

Doctors are not exactly known for having low (or falling) salaries, so maybe your logic is not that solid.

And there are many well-paid positions in hi-tech not involving working in surveillance part of Facebook or in Facebook at all.

Around here (public/socialized/“free” European healthcare system) doctors are known to be paid poorly, unless high-tier specialists, so maybe you’re over-assuming.

Well, sure, in Europe it's different but the original topic was about Facebook, which is headquartered in the US. The idea was that high payment is because the job is undesirable and has bad reputation. This does not seem to be true, as many reputable and desirable professions in the US have high salary, including doctors.