- developer A is tasked to create the prompt to ask for username and password of the email account
- developer B is tasked to call some API to upload contacts from email account
- developer C is tasked to bind two functionalities.
Now replace developers with teams and you see how simple is for the average developer to underestimate the scope and the ethical bounds of a given task.
That implies that you, as a developer, then hear new stories like this one and simply ignore any role you may or may not have had in the situation. It implies that you simply ignore that your manager or engineering leadership are asking you to do things that are unethical without informing you about how your work will be used. It implies that you continue to work for that leadership knowing that they will lie to you, hide their true intentions, and use your labor to execute profoundly unethical practices.
It's not news at this point to anyone working at FB what their leadership is engaged in, and what their work is being used to accomplish.
Perhaps several years ago you could claim some kind of ignorance.
That's no longer the case. You know who you work for. Own it.
I’m more surprised that people are still being “surprised” that Facebook isn’t a wholesome company out to make the world a better place through algorithmic social manipulation.
Let’s not be ignorant of the idea of one or two senior developers each given a suitcase full of cash. It’s not like learning to program magically gives you unbreakable ethics.
Even at this point, you’re not getting a mass exodus of workers from Facebook. Those in there are choosing to be there at this point. Koolaid or not.
But you are right, scope creep in the “unethical” aspects and it can suddenly be “no one’s fault”. That isn’t a bad plan.
I’m not one of them, but let me play the devil’s advocate...
You’re getting paid 2x market salary (“market” here being non-Facebook and non-Google, which isn’t any better) and delivering services to people who voluntarily sign up ro them... I mean there are worse jobs in the world.
“That’s a really dick of an idea and I’m pretty sure it’s illegal. Exactly how illegal, I’m not sure. But I know illegal to some degree.”
“You live in a shit apartment because housing prices are stupid and makes your salary meaningless in this town. Here’s a wheelbarrow full of hundreds and we all agree it was an accident.”
I’m dead serious when I say that no two large scale projects are done the same way. I have seen many and can tell you the possibilities are infinite how it gets approached
But seriously. There’s no accident in what happened. This is Facebook. Anyone who thinks Facebook isn’t morally corrupt probably also says “What do you mean Stalin wasn’t a pacifist?”
Well first of all this isn't a phone call so there's no chance at all of wiretapping charges regardless of any other circumstances. Second of all, the only potentially related charge would be something like eavesdropping and while that would vary by state, that would have required Google to actually use the microphone. If they didn't actually eavesdrop on anyone or design that in with the intent to eavesdrop on anyone then they haven't committed any kind of eavesdropping crime.
A gun to your head is a threat of violence - that’s the criminal act. Threatening murder is a crime in itself.
The crime of wiretapping would be secretly listening/recording (and willfully so, not by accident as e.g. when baby monitors cross-talk). Having an inactive piece of hardware present, with no intention of using it for spying, is not a crime.
Having the hardware present is extremely unlikely to be nefarious. It could have been (a probably was) future-proofing. It could be a bundled package (unlikely I think for a mic, but you e.g. pretty much can’t buy cheap motion sensors without temp and luminosity bundled, so things like Philips Hue motion sensors measure temperature too).
I disagree strongly that characterisation of stupid and dishonest. Play ball. You didn't know about the gun to your head, are you ok with that? It was futureproofing in case you later might want the gun and we're claiming it's not loaded.
Yes gun to the head is the extreme example, that's the point. Not switching it on does not absolve you of guilt. Same thing here.
That is an entirely reasonable point of view and argument. If you really do find it stupid and/or dishonest reflect on that.
If there is no law against putting secret wire taps in people's houses "by mistake" and claiming it wasn't switched on there should be because ethically its a crime worthy of the Stasi. I would prefer if we didn't have a turnkey solution to creation of a facist state of the kind the soviets could only dream of. Perhaps you like the idea? Ah but "google wouldn't" So there's no need for law surrounding google because they just wouldn't. I know some of the engineers and no way would they allow that.
Democracy deserves better defence. Even if the gun to your head is never fired and you don't know about it. Criminal. If the law says otherwise, change it.
Now I wonder if there is something you would like to disclose about your vested interests? Perhaps not. I'm old enough to remember smart and kind people being Soviet apologists then finding out later something approximating the truth to their revulsion. You don't have to be on the take to be an apologist. But there is a lot of defence of big silicon valley companies behaving badly around here and very little "Disclosure, I work for.." going on.
One of the best episodes of Black Mirror. Truly made me have deep thoughts about myself, life, and where humanity is going. Immortality seems indeed achievable, but not in a biological way our ancestors imagined.
