Unless you have been doing deeply corrupt work for them for years you are not going to be making any change at that megacorp. I know someone who worked there and they just remove anyone who does not conform.
At the same time, you help Facebook do what it currently does, i.e. unethical stuff. I dont think an individual engineers ability to influence a company they dont own outweighs their contributions.
Not necessarily. You don't have to lie during the recruitment/interview. If you get in you get in. And you can resign when they ask you to do something you feel you should not participate in.
Simply trying to get in to be on the inside - without lying, is better than not even trying.
Of course, trying to advocate for better political control (privacy, transparency, lower barriers to enter the market) is important, and can and should be done while trying to engage with FB, trying to get close to their internal decision making process.
And, naturally, not everyone has the affinity to work at FB, but since it's a spectrum, likely there are a lot of software engineers that do have some ethical concern with regards to what and how FB does, and they shouldn't be discouraged from working at FB, but they should be very much empowered to be able to stand up and leave when their moral compass signals.
Eh I don't think that holds universally - and even when it does is an inversion of responsibility. A small mutual protection street gang maybe could work for with resources but one doesn't make a vicious gang like the Cartels nicer by joining them and trying to reform them from the inside.
Okay, it might not hold, that it's the best place to try to exert change, but it's undeniably a channel of interaction. Not exploiting it leads to less change.