Honestly, I would accept a job at Facebook.
One idea from the reading that stood out to me is the claim that “if you really want to avoid touching unethical work, then your best option may be to do whatever’s necessary to build the strongest resume possible. Once you’ve done that, your options for working will increase and correspondingly the possibility for ethically satisfying employment.” This highlights how society often shifts the burden of ethical responsibility onto individuals, rather than creating systems that better support ethical choices. That tension is what makes this question so difficult to answer. At the same time, as Stanford CS students, we have certain advantages and privileges that allow us more freedom to choose. There are certainly companies I would not work for. However, I believe Facebook/Meta also drives a lot of positive impact. They connect people overseas, invest in renewable energy, empower small businesses, among other efforts. Of course, there are a lot of unethical initiatives too. If I had a choice, or if my team was not something I agree with, I might not accept a Facebook job.
The article also makes the point that if you refuse to participate in any company that has ever done harm, “you’re not going to be able to participate in anything.” In reality, most of what we build as computer scientists already contributes in some way to widening the digital divide or harming the environment. In that sense, it feels almost impossible to remain completely “ethical.” For me, the more realistic path is to take opportunities to influence practices from within these powerful companies, rather than avoiding them altogether. I think even if there is one person from the inside challenging some unethical belief, that can spark some change, even if it isn’t at a large scale.
