Hacker News Reader

Comment by iscrewyou | Hacker News Reader

Someone tell these yahoos that optics is a thing.

I expect the next statement to be about transparency and connecting communities. Just like the last one. And the one before.

View on HN

for facebook optics is not a thing.

they know they have a stranglehold on people addicted to their products, and advertisers who pay through the nose to sell things to those addicts.

Honestly, why bother with optics? No one's going to like the company ever again except their employees, but no business or politician or organization is going to not take facebook's call.

^ this HN reader has it right. And we'll see the extent of that truth tomorrow when FB announces their earnings. Most of the problems in the world can be solved with robust revenue growth. It's only when you're on the decline that "optics" begin to matter, and FB is most certainly not in decline, at least outside the HN bubble.

I disagree strongly with this, if FB manages to continue pissing off politicians they'll get the full unjust wrath of the US government turned on them for petty reasons. Just a little while ago Zuckerberg got schooled on why he should've been paying a lot more money to lobbyists.

But that's not the "optics" you're likely to see. Those kinds of things only come to light much later, and FB has historically shown itself to be very amenable to such backroom deals: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/facebook-data-...

It depends on how the ongoing Cambridge Analytica scandal goes.

Gawker closed up despite it's billion-dollar Unicorn status because of a $140M verdict. A multi-billion dollar suit like the Cambridge Analytica could be devastating.

You're missing one simple fact: people in the House, Senate, and Oval Office (irrespective of administration) need FB to get elected nowadays. They also need docile/agreeable Zuck. FB isn't going anywhere.

Why bother with optics? Well, for one thing, presumably they still need to recruit people once in a while (including people with lots and lots of options).

Anyone who will work for facebook now doesn't care about optics.

They solve this problem with large wads of cash and FB stock. A couple of my friends there make close to a million dollars a year each in total comp just being middle managers. FB has no problem whatsoever with recruiting or retention of top talent.

IMO, the kind of people who work for and who would join Facebook are the ones who're self-selected to not care about morals or the ill effects of their work on billions of people. So optics doesn't come into the equation for Facebook to recruit people. Those who do care about optics would never even dream of working at Facebook.

You're exaggerating. What are those ill effects exactly?

Consult the N apologies Zuckerberg has issued on things like privacy for some examples.

Normal people outside the tech bubble still like Facebook. Even inside it there are people who do (I like Facebook).

Facebook is absolutely terrible at optics, and I'd love it if someone with weak enough morals to be involved with the PATRIOT ACT was unable to find work again but... I honestly don't care that much, this is just a drop in the water compared to the revolving doors between the government and defense firms.

Optics don't seem to matter as much in some cases. There was a big hue and cry in 2014 when Condoleeza Rice was appointed to the board of directors of Dropbox. She's still around on the board. [1] All the protests with #DropDropbox, the threats to ditch the service and actions by many to ditch it didn't achieve much.

I doubt if many people understand the deep implications of The Patriot Act as much as they may understand water boarding and other tactics.

[1]: https://www.dropbox.com/about

Reply on news.ycombinator.com