News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by xnorswap on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @07:42AM (#47862178)
"Companies should be able to bully their staff, since their staff are free to quit" is not compatible with a decent society.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by amiga386 on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @07:57AM (#47862316)
"Companies should be able to offer massively addictive and manipulative websites, since their users are free to not look at them" is not compatible with a decent society either.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by andrepd on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:03AM (#47862378)
> since their users are free to not look at them

It's even worse when you consider that even if you were to opt out of Meta services entirely (which is not practical due to how many essential things run on e.g. whatsapp), they still build a shadow profile on you based only on data other people upload about you. So yeah, not only "just don't use it" is not a reasonable argument, it doesn't even solve anything!

Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by onemoresoop on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:06AM (#47862412)
Their argument: users are free not to think about it.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by mingus88 on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:48AM (#47862820)
> which is not practical due to how many essential things run on e.g. whatsapp

Where do you live that WhatsApp is essential?

I deleted my account when Facebook bought it and I don’t feel like anything of value was lost. Between messages/sms, signal, telegram, discord, I have no shortage of places to chat.

WhatsApp only has value because of the network effect. Quit the platform and make your contacts find you elsewhere. Every platform dies eventually. The users just need to leave.

I don’t really care about the shadow profile. Meta is hardly the first to build a database of non customers, and it’s not the only such database I’m in. I avoid all Meta services and will never see an ad from them.

Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by piva00 on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @09:24AM (#47863274)
> Where do you live that WhatsApp is essential?

In Brazil, for example, without WhatsApp you are an outcast of modern society there, businesses communicate with customers on WhatsApp, whole families and friend groups only use WhatsApp.

> WhatsApp only has value because of the network effect. Quit the platform and make your contacts find you elsewhere. Every platform dies eventually. The users just need to leave.

The network effect is exactly what makes it really hard for any single user to decide "I'm leaving" and tell every single person they need to be in touch to contact on another platform they don't use. What you are suggesting is simply impossible on an individual level, the only way it happens is if the platform has major issues that bleed users because it isn't working or the platform is made inaccessible by the government. Even a better competitor appearing will have a very hard time to crack the market share of a established network exactly due to network effects.

Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by nyantaro1 on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @04:00PM (#47868506)
Same exact case in Mexico. Likely in most other Latin-American countries as well
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by derwiki on Thursday April 23, 2026 @09:03AM (#47875264)
I live in San Francisco and essentially everything around little kids/school lives on WhatsApp. It is supremely annoying.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by 2ndorderthought on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:06AM (#47862404)
Want them to stick through a 10 year lawsuit while they get fired anyways? Do you think there is a lot of hope of winning such a lawsuit? Metas CEO hangs out at the Pentagon and has bomb bunkers. They can do whatever they want to their employees
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by mystraline on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:14AM (#47862487)
In the old days, before federally recognized unions and those things, when the company/boss did something terrible....

The workers would arm up with shotguns, rifles, Molotov cocktails. They'd then go to the bosses' house and have a "chat". If they didn't listen, they'd have their house shot up or burned to the ground.

It was the very bosses that hired Pinkerton's to go murder the union leaders as well.

Some of the railroad unionization got so bloody and violent that even the US military got in on the action, in favor of companies.

In the end, we got the NLRB and a whole host of rights. The violence did indeed work, but saying that is somehow breaking unforgivable speech.

And if violence isnt up to these meta engineers, perhaps they should look into CIA's own simple sabotage field manual techniques.

Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by vasco on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @07:54AM (#47862287)
I agree and consider a lot of regulation to be useful but there are some examples of this where I think we just perpetuate bad companies into existing when they'dgo bankrupt or have to pay wild salaries to compensate being shitty. But it just doesn't seem practical to expect people to stop working for bad companies. In the country I'm from the average salary is super close to the minimum wage with low unemployment so technically employees could change easily and find another job with the same minimum wage and still people stay at bad companies. It'd be the best regulator if people quit, even unions wouldn't need to exist, under this light a union just perpetuates a bad boss, but human nature is not changing so protections are needed.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by maribozu on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @08:42AM (#47862759)
This line immediately brought various Dilbert images to my mind.
Re:Irony as Meta staff unhappy about running surveillance so... by analog8374 on Wednesday April 22, 2026 @10:21AM (#47864083)
moderators should be free to censor users, since the users are free to leave the forum.

This appears to be a common philosophy. We all know it's foul, and then we cover up the smell with this thin justification and move on.

But ya, this seems to be commonly accepted already