3 ms·

As a personal investor I hold a few Amazon stocks (yes, not much, but I have a small bet on Amazon). Nevertheless, I see a huge risk to doing this kind of busi

by jopsen 8y ago

As a personal investor I hold a few Amazon stocks (yes, not much, but I have a small bet on Amazon). Nevertheless, I see a huge risk to doing this kind of business. Short term there might be profit, but long term it hurts your brand with consumers and erodes trust. A consumer dependent company like Amazon should avoid getting into ethical issues. Because it limits long term growth. At least that's my two cents.

macspoofing 8y ago
>but long term it hurts your brand with consumers and erodes trust In crazy circles maybe. I'm not seeing any sort of backlash against the military as Americans generally have a very positive view of it.
- SauciestGNU 8y ago
  I think it's disingenuous to call anyone opposed to persistent surveillance and the military "crazy". There are numerous reasons people would be opposed to those institutions and practices. And the more abused those things are, the more people will likely oppose them.
  - macspoofing 8y ago
    >I think it's disingenuous to call anyone opposed to persistent surveillance and the military "crazy" I didn't label people who are against 'persistent surveillance' as crazy. I don't know why you attributed that to me. Though I will state that there is nothing wrong with an American company providing services to the American government. If you hate 'persistent surveillance' look to Congress, not contractors. To extend my point to the military, it is unreasonable to label an American company providing services to the American military as intrinsically unethical.
- jopsen 8y ago
  In the long run the US isn't the only market. > I'm not seeing any sort of backlash against the military as Americans generally have a very positive view of it. That might be true. But the military is many things, serving is in many ways honorable, creating weapons from behind a desk -- not so much. Regardless, in the long run we are likely to see the end of armed conflicts. Investment in military tech will likely drop. That might take 20 years, or it might take 200 years. But war doesn't create economic growth, why bother getting involved?

by jopsen 8y ago

macspoofing 8y ago

>but long term it hurts your brand with consumers and erodes trust In crazy circles maybe. I'm not seeing any sort of backlash against the military as Americans generally have a very positive view of it.

SauciestGNU 8y ago
I think it's disingenuous to call anyone opposed to persistent surveillance and the military "crazy". There are numerous reasons people would be opposed to those institutions and practices. And the more abused those things are, the more people will likely oppose them.
- macspoofing 8y ago
  >I think it's disingenuous to call anyone opposed to persistent surveillance and the military "crazy" I didn't label people who are against 'persistent surveillance' as crazy. I don't know why you attributed that to me. Though I will state that there is nothing wrong with an American company providing services to the American government. If you hate 'persistent surveillance' look to Congress, not contractors. To extend my point to the military, it is unreasonable to label an American company providing services to the American military as intrinsically unethical.
jopsen 8y ago
In the long run the US isn't the only market. > I'm not seeing any sort of backlash against the military as Americans generally have a very positive view of it. That might be true. But the military is many things, serving is in many ways honorable, creating weapons from behind a desk -- not so much. Regardless, in the long run we are likely to see the end of armed conflicts. Investment in military tech will likely drop. That might take 20 years, or it might take 200 years. But war doesn't create economic growth, why bother getting involved?