3 ms·

I would assume a core tenet of ethics and deciding if something is unethical is if it has the potential to harm people. Inducing depression to indiscriminate m

by zzzeek 8y ago

I would assume a core tenet of ethics and deciding if something is unethical is if it has the potential to harm people. Inducing depression to indiscriminate masses is pretty high on the list. It's not valid to compare the emotional impact of Facebook on millions of its addicted users to something like the color of a box of laundry detergent.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
TulliusCicero 8y ago
Selling cake has the potential to harm people, a moral framework needs a bit more subtlety than that to be sensible.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- zzzeek 8y ago
  do folks "sell cake" to see if it worsens people's depression? this is more like selling cake that secretly has nuts in it which are known to cause allergic reactions without disclosing it.
  - staticassertion 8y ago
    Well, it's more like if the nuts had an unknown reaction, and the idea was to figure out what the reaction was by slipping it into some cake, and then observing.
    - zzzeek 8y ago
      which would be massively unethical if not illegal to do as a food manufacturer
- ddingus 8y ago
  Well, including laxative to judge how much people can tolerate before they get the shits isn't far off the mark from inducing depression. FB - A little negative = meh FB - More negative = major downer FB - Totally negative = woah, look at the sorry state they are in now. Cake - A little laxative = mmm this cake is special somehow Cake - More laxative = nice cake, special, where is the roll of extra TP? Cake - Dump it in = people home for days, the shits. In both cases, not telling them is the ethics problem. Basically the public trust boils down to people expecting others not to harm them. Depression can become chronic. The shits could damage someone requiring medical help. Both are clear risks people would very likely avoid, if they knew. FB - We want to run a depression test. Plz volunteer your feed and see if you get depressed. Cake - We have a laxative that tastes great, but you might get the shits, plz have some cake. See the problem?

by zzzeek 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

TulliusCicero 8y ago

Selling cake has the potential to harm people, a moral framework needs a bit more subtlety than that to be sensible.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
zzzeek 8y ago
do folks "sell cake" to see if it worsens people's depression? this is more like selling cake that secretly has nuts in it which are known to cause allergic reactions without disclosing it.
- staticassertion 8y ago
  Well, it's more like if the nuts had an unknown reaction, and the idea was to figure out what the reaction was by slipping it into some cake, and then observing.
  - zzzeek 8y ago
    which would be massively unethical if not illegal to do as a food manufacturer
ddingus 8y ago
Well, including laxative to judge how much people can tolerate before they get the shits isn't far off the mark from inducing depression. FB - A little negative = meh FB - More negative = major downer FB - Totally negative = woah, look at the sorry state they are in now. Cake - A little laxative = mmm this cake is special somehow Cake - More laxative = nice cake, special, where is the roll of extra TP? Cake - Dump it in = people home for days, the shits. In both cases, not telling them is the ethics problem. Basically the public trust boils down to people expecting others not to harm them. Depression can become chronic. The shits could damage someone requiring medical help. Both are clear risks people would very likely avoid, if they knew. FB - We want to run a depression test. Plz volunteer your feed and see if you get depressed. Cake - We have a laxative that tastes great, but you might get the shits, plz have some cake. See the problem?