I thought that people working at Mozilla were passionate about privacy, open-source, trust, and were working at Mozilla for the values.

But you say many of them would work to the company with opposite values.

IIRC Facebook has more than 100 privacy engineers (it's been a few years since I spoke to recruiters there). Facebook has challenges, but it also presents an opportunity to work on security and privacy challenges in way that doesn't exist in many places in the world.

Interpretations of other peoples values is largely skewed by their perception, and rarely takes into account the practical realities of working on privacy and security in tech.

Considering Facebook's business model, I would guess that these engineers are there for privacywashing (like greenwashing).

That's one interpretation, and I am by no means trying to defend Facebok, or their privacy team, but it is an extremely uncharitable interpretation.

There are many, many, many folks who work in positions that allow them to provide for themselves, their families, and their communities while working for objectionable organizations.

Look at all of the public servants who are keeping the lights on and trying to keep the US government running. I guarantee you there are folks who absolutely abhor how the system is run, and despise the leadership and politicians (regardless of which leader is in power), but they show up every day and do their job, and try to help people.

It's not ideal, but when you get a burger it wasn't made from a spherical cow of uniform density either...

Are you under the impression that Facebook doesn't have privacy guidelines and strategies for its users just because its privacy goals don't align with yours? Just because they aren't the bastion of privacy doesn't mean they disregard privacy completely. Simple example: If I set my profile to be viewable by friends-only, that is a privacy feature. There are 800 more examples like that pertaining to protecting user data.

Facebook is the opposite of a privacy bastion. If you have such privacy features, it's only to stay relevant in the market and maintain some degree of trust so users continue to publish their data. Facebook do not care about privacy, they track people everywhere they can. They accumulate data and sell the knowledge they collected.

Engineers who really care about privacy do not work for Facebook like engineers who really cares about peace do not work for the army.

That's great and all, but I was responding to your message that all the engineers focused on privacy at Facebook are just there for privacywashing. You don't seem to get that privacy is not a binary. I totally get that facebook "doesn't care about privacy" from the perspective of someone who actually cares a lot about privacy. But that's not the argument here, and it's strange for you to bring it up in your response. Nothing you've said actually supports the idea that Facebook doesn't need to have engineers who legitimately work on privacy.

Like any company's employees: they're all different people! They each have their own reasons for where they work and their own goals and ambitions.

Any job you take is going to be a blend and balance across your personal passions, values, talents, desire for impact, financial goals and responsibilities, risk tolerance, and alternative available opportunities.

Is it so surprising that one of the largest employers in the bay has attractive opportunities across a range of reasons?

Employee motivations have zero relevance when discussing corporate actions where those actions are contrary to those motivations.

The reverse is not true.

The reality is that most people like working with smart peers and cool technology. Being paid is also nice.

Any moral or ethical values is somewhere in the middle of the pyramid of needs.