[k8svet]

So... this sounds like OAuth, with a nice consent scene that says I'm giving Netflix this access to my FB DNs. That's what you mean, right? Otherwise, what the fuck is the difference?.

And really, as if this makes anything better, wow. Imagine having the feeling of obligation that you have to stick your neck out over this. Just take your over-sized salary and be happy knowing you work for one of the worst companies of our time. (despite my tone, at this point, I honestly say that without judgement, just ... own it.)

[aardvarkr]

When you give your mail client credentials to read your email , would you not expect your client to be able to read your mail?

On Android, when you give a third party client permission to receive SMS, you don’t expect it to have access to your SMS?

[navigate8310]

Totally agree with the sentiment here. The comment by the employee make it sound like it's the user's fault. Something akin to dark pattern and malicious compliance by giving the user an OAuth consent for their DM.

[rezonant]

It's only a dark pattern if this was the permission Netflix asked for when you hit "Sign in with Facebook" or some other unrelated feature. If the permission was granted when you tried to use Netflix Chat, a bidirectional in-app chat powered by Facebook, then its not a dark pattern at all, its just the usual way things are done.

[k8svet]

Lmao, love seeing what HN decides is controversial these days.

God give me the power of some of y'all's utterly depraved self-serving self-delusion. I at least acknowledge the moral compromise of how my labor accrues in the system instead of burying my god damn head in the sand about it and offering poor incoherent defenses of my employee in public. And I make a third of what I could make at FB, and still probably don't contribute as negatively to the world.