Hacker News Reader

Comment by ActorNightly | Hacker News Reader

I hope you realize that you have addressed nothing in my post, you are just squirming on some irrelevant stuff.

Once you find a solid counter argument to "its a product that people are free not to use", then we can have a conversation.

View on HN

Anyone with kids could tell you that this is an ethically vacant position to hold. Particularly given the social network effects of not being on these platforms and the addiction engineering that goes into keeping you on them, especially at an age when you're prone to feeling insecure about your place in the world. The effects are pronounced in children, but still hold for adults.

Anyway, I think I've said all I possibly can to educate you. I hope you can take something from it.

Gotcha so basically what you are saying is that its not the parents responsibility to raise their kids, the society should be structured so that everything that the kid has access to be under tight legal control, from tv shows, to prodcuts they see in stores, to celebrities being legally required to speak and act a certain way, and so on.

TLDR, if you can do that much mental gymastics, you can probably do the same to justify you taking the Meta job.

I wouldn't normally reply again, but please try and take my arguments in the good faith and appeal to the heart and humanity that they were given. I think you're quite capable of reading what I've written and responding to it coherently; consequently, I also think you must be aware that you haven't done this in the heat of the disagreement. It's only if we're charitable, not cynical, about this stuff that the world may improve. Thanks. :)

Your good faith arguments are not good faith. You are basically saying it feels right to be against Meta, therefore your arguments are correct. World doesn't work like that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com