3 ms·
Yeah, by definition capitalism is amoral. Their obligated to increase shareholder value and that's it. If telling the US Intelligence apparatus to fuck off serv
by ozi 10y ago
Yeah, by definition capitalism is amoral. Their obligated to increase shareholder value and that's it. If telling the US Intelligence apparatus to fuck off serves that purpose, then it's a course of action Microsoft must take.
"Doing the right thing" is not what Microsoft cares about on a macro level. It just so happens that in this instance its actions align with the interests of most people.
- m_mueller 10y agoIt's multiple levels of indirection here, but the interests of most people are supposed to be reflected in law and governance in a democracy. It's arguable that the interest of most EU citizens at least are reflected in Microsoft's actions here.
- tunap 10y ago"interests of most people"(eg. shareholders) is not necessarily the same as"increase shareholder value", which is their legal mandate under corporate law. In this case, I have no doubt, and admittedly no proof, that this is posturing to salvage their perceived respect for privacy in the public eye despite their previous actions and the conflict to their prime directive. They already sell the data to 3rd parties, their beef is they did not get paid in this/these instances.
- m_mueller 10y agoMy point is that it's perfectly fine for corporations to just maximize shareholder value, as long as it's within a legal framework provided by democratically elected governments. That's precisely the purpose of governments, to guide society into a direction that's beneficial for the public as a whole, and they are elected based on their promises in this regard.