this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
301 points (92.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

19623 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website -1 points 5 months ago (25 children)

If you work for FAANG you're morally bankrupt

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 39 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (23 children)

But financially bussin'!

And also, it's actually a complicated question. A one-man boycott doesn't do anything. If you work at a FAANG, work for a better world when you're off, and go whistleblower when they do something really evil, I find no fault in that at all.

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago (5 children)

The other consideration is that pretty much every company you could work for as a software developer is going to try to take advantage of your work. Most companies are morally bad at best and morally terrible at worst. If you discourage any good person from working there, the problem will only snowball from there.

If working at FAANG gives you the resources to support things you're passionate about, and you're willing to stand up for your values when they do something bad, there isn't a problem with that IMO.

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

FAANG is just as exploitative if not more than the average in the industry.

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

My point wasn't that FAANG isn't exploitative (my bad if it came off that way, I didn't mean for that), it's that everywhere else is also exploitative to some degree (most probably less so than FAANG, there are definitely a few that are worse though), and that it could still be reasonable to work there for some people.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)