4 ms·
I don’t think it’s ridiculous. I think it simply says that people with stringent ethics cannot serve others and cede control. They may bootstrap their own busin
by aratno 8y ago
I don’t think it’s ridiculous. I think it simply says that people with stringent ethics cannot serve others and cede control. They may bootstrap their own businesses, become their own bosses, or find another way to operate independently.
For some, control is relinquished to VCs. For others, it is the funders of their research, or their bosses.
Most people are not as picky about their ethics as they are about their diets.
- astura 8y agoBy his logic you shouldn't do that either just replace "your boss" with "your customers." "don't start a business because if you do then your customers might eventually ask you to do something (that's legal) that you disagree with." Except his argument is even sillier, because he's actually arguing that "might eventually" is actually "inevitably." That it's just inevitable that DARPA funded cancer research naturally turns into building cruise missiles.
- watwut 8y agoYou can refuse customer. You can not breach already written contract.
- astura 8y agoIf nobody's buying what you're selling, then you have no business.
- watwut 8y agoThat still allows you to refuse fair amount of customers. Because here, the condition is "most or all potential customers want exclusively things you don't want to do" which may happen, but is significantly less likely.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoBut then you're trading money for morality directly. For most businesses, customers are to some extent fungible, so you can afford to be a little picky if you're careful about the health of your company.