They should have lesser, though still real, baggage attached to them. There are definitely a few types of people in computer science who refuse to touch FAANG employees, but it's not as widespread as I wish it were.

Why should they have lesser baggage attached to them?

NSA is unambiguously doing worse things than any FAANG or adtech company could do in their wildest wet dreams.

"NSA staff used spy tools on spouses, ex-lovers"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog...

Optic Nerve ("GCHQ" in title is misleading because the NSA played a very enthusiastic helping role in it):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optic_Nerve_(GCHQ)

ECHELON:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

There's so much they're responsible for that it seems like it'd be excessive to post all of them, and HN has a character limit, anyway. Even the most well-known ones would fill a couple of comments.

Agreed, corrupt(ed) NSA people can do very bad stuff to targeted individuals.

However, adtech companies damage everyone, and fairly significantly. eg concentration problems, addictive behaviours, etc.

That's literally "human race" level damage.

Doesn't seem like a lesser thing to me. :/

Targeted individuals?

They, for years until it was leaked, "targeted" every phone call in the United States:

https://gizmodo.com/this-government-phone-tapping-thing-just...

And 125,000,000,000 globally, along with almost a hundred billion internet requests per month in a time when the Internet was much smaller, years ago, under a program that hasn't stopped:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundless_Informant

This definitely damages everyone, and I think more fundamentally than adtech companies. You can escape adtech companies: use different websites, install an adblocker, block trackers, whatever. There's no obvious way outside of strong encryption and hermitry to avoid NSA getting its paws on every single public or private communication you ever make, given their record. When privacy doesn't and cannot exist, human behavior changes deeply. I think it's the greater of two evils.

Adtech companies definitely aren't good, by any stretch, but I think it's the difference between Ghengis Khan and a common killer: sure, they both want to kill you, but the scale and the level of cruelty is much different.

If different groups all operate in a way that is unacceptable, then it doesn't really matter (in practical terms) which group is worse than the other.

Sure, but if one group is operating in an unacceptable fashion along the lines of "We're stealing candy from babies!" and the other is "We're not only a risk to your business, your customers, and you, but also to the entire world, and also we have actually pretty legitimate ties to murder and also coups and also maybe war crimes a little," the first is child's play in comparison.

Haven't been in a position to sort resumes yet.

If I ever am, NSA in the history is a solid red flag. Be nice or go home. Willingness to participate in all that makes me wonder about your character.

Facebook almost as much, depending on when and for how long. The more recent, or longer sustained stay, again. Be nice or go home.

Google a little bit more reasonable, especially if only ever on the app/project side vs main service.

Adtech experience, I'd have to ask if they'd washed their minds out and won't even consider any of those tactics ever again... on second thought, almost as bad a flag as NSA crap.

Even if it's only a small drop of resistance in an ocean of "yeah, ok, whatever", I feel like we should signal that certain behaviors _against_ your fellow humans are poorly regarded.

Edit: figured this would get downvotes, ah well.

> Willingness to participate in all that

Participate in what? The NSA does many different things and has many different positions. Would you hold NSA's janitors responsible as well?

Speaking generally, I view anyone who works for a very problematic company or agency in a worse light for it, regardless of whether they're at the bottom or top of the ladder.

Obviously, the higher up the ladder a person, the stronger this effect is. However, that someone is willing to work in any capacity at an organization that behaves badly (in my view) says something about that person.

So your answer is, yes, you'd hold NSA's janitors responsible... I hope you never become an employer!

That's not what I said, but perhaps you have to define what you mean by "hold them responsible". As I interpret that phrase, no, I wouldn't hold them responsible as such, but that they are willing to work there in any capacity says something about them.

Strawman. Obvious from context I'm referring to anyone involved in the SIGINT against CONUS and the Internet, and anything related.

Not a strawman- you stated "NSA in the history". Believe it or not employees work on all sorts of projects.

Yes.