3 ms·

This comment is offtopic. The parent comment is discussing the ethics of lying and that customers accept it.

zaroth 7y ago
You say the companies "lie". Perhaps a good example would be Elon's "funding secured" tweet? You asked why customers accept it? Customers accept that Elon lied on Twitter because they love the products the company makes more than they don't love Elon lying on Twitter. I would further posit that customers love Tesla because, by and large, Tesla does not lie about its products' capabilities, even if they ultimately fail to deliver the product they want to, or are overly ambitious on delivery dates, or overly optimistic of what's theoretically possible. You don't set off to build a mass market EV in 2006 without a great deal of starry-eyed optimism. I don't want to go down the rabbit hole with "throwayEngineer" but IMO Elon tweets a huge amount about his products, and the vast majority of those tweets are factual, exciting, and/or funny. OP says these companies "lie" as if it's the only thing they do, or that if a company "lies" how can that be a good thing? That's an obtuse question used as a rhetorical trick, and I think it's an uninteresting discussion. The reality is that all companies do a vast array of things, and yes, sometimes, they tell lies. Whether Apple and Tesla are more egregious examples of "companies that lie" than say Exxon or Boeing, I doubt it. I personally believe Apple and Tesla do not intentionally devise schemes on how to best lie to their customers, while I have much less of a problem imagining Exxon or Boeing doing exactly that. The reason for that disparity, is a more interesting topic. I think it's because I love Apple and Tesla products more than I love Exxon or Boeing products, and we treat the things we love differently than things we are ambivalent about, including painting over the flaws, and believing they have good intentions.
- magduf 7y ago
  Personally, I'd say Elon is a lot more honest than Apple ever was. Remember, Apple is the one telling everyone they really don't want a headphone jack, even if they do. (Wireless headphones have significant downsides.) As for Exxon, that's apples and oranges. Exxon doesn't make any products. It produces oil, which is a fungible commodity, not a branded product that's different from competitors' products in real and significant ways. Boeing, too, is a pretty bad comparison. No one actually buys Boeing planes (except airline companies). As a consumer, you can try to choose non-Boeing planes to fly on when you book tickets, but that's about it. You're not their customer.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    But that's exactly my point. Since they aren't brands that consumers can really love and connect to, they are more likely to be viewed as an evil empire. E.g. I was trying to avoid the pissing contest of whether Apple or Google or whoever is more loved.
    - magduf 7y ago
      That's the problem with your point: you were making an apples-to-oranges comparison. You're comparing brands that do connect directly to consumers and sell to them with brands that really don't. Even Google isn't a great comparison, because consumers only use Google's services like GMail and search; they don't buy products from it very much. Android phones are (mostly) made by other companies: Huawei, LG, Samsung, etc. Maybe you should try comparing Apple and Samsung instead, or Tesla and Honda. Those are direct comparisons.
      - zaroth 7y ago
        Sorry, I think we’re talking past each other.
  - djmips 7y ago
    Consumers purchase gasoline directly. Boeing cares what the public thinks because their customers (airlines) care what the public thinks.
    - magduf 7y ago
      Consumers mostly don't care about the brand of gasoline, only the convenience and price of the gas station. Gasoline is all the same; Exxon gas isn't significantly different from Sunoco or BP gas. Boeing doesn't sell to consumers. As I said above, this just isn't a valid comparison at all.

You say the companies "lie". Perhaps a good example would be Elon's "funding secured" tweet? You asked why customers accept it? Customers accept that Elon lied on Twitter because they love the products the company makes more than they don't love Elon lying on Twitter. I would further posit that customers love Tesla because, by and large, Tesla does not lie about its products' capabilities, even if they ultimately fail to deliver the product they want to, or are overly ambitious on delivery dates, or overly optimistic of what's theoretically possible. You don't set off to build a mass market EV in 2006 without a great deal of starry-eyed optimism. I don't want to go down the rabbit hole with "throwayEngineer" but IMO Elon tweets a huge amount about his products, and the vast majority of those tweets are factual, exciting, and/or funny. OP says these companies "lie" as if it's the only thing they do, or that if a company "lies" how can that be a good thing? That's an obtuse question used as a rhetorical trick, and I think it's an uninteresting discussion. The reality is that all companies do a vast array of things, and yes, sometimes, they tell lies. Whether Apple and Tesla are more egregious examples of "companies that lie" than say Exxon or Boeing, I doubt it. I personally believe Apple and Tesla do not intentionally devise schemes on how to best lie to their customers, while I have much less of a problem imagining Exxon or Boeing doing exactly that. The reason for that disparity, is a more interesting topic. I think it's because I love Apple and Tesla products more than I love Exxon or Boeing products, and we treat the things we love differently than things we are ambivalent about, including painting over the flaws, and believing they have good intentions.

magduf 7y ago
Personally, I'd say Elon is a lot more honest than Apple ever was. Remember, Apple is the one telling everyone they really don't want a headphone jack, even if they do. (Wireless headphones have significant downsides.) As for Exxon, that's apples and oranges. Exxon doesn't make any products. It produces oil, which is a fungible commodity, not a branded product that's different from competitors' products in real and significant ways. Boeing, too, is a pretty bad comparison. No one actually buys Boeing planes (except airline companies). As a consumer, you can try to choose non-Boeing planes to fly on when you book tickets, but that's about it. You're not their customer.
- zaroth 7y ago
  But that's exactly my point. Since they aren't brands that consumers can really love and connect to, they are more likely to be viewed as an evil empire. E.g. I was trying to avoid the pissing contest of whether Apple or Google or whoever is more loved.
  - magduf 7y ago
    That's the problem with your point: you were making an apples-to-oranges comparison. You're comparing brands that do connect directly to consumers and sell to them with brands that really don't. Even Google isn't a great comparison, because consumers only use Google's services like GMail and search; they don't buy products from it very much. Android phones are (mostly) made by other companies: Huawei, LG, Samsung, etc. Maybe you should try comparing Apple and Samsung instead, or Tesla and Honda. Those are direct comparisons.
    - zaroth 7y ago
      Sorry, I think we’re talking past each other.
- djmips 7y ago
  Consumers purchase gasoline directly. Boeing cares what the public thinks because their customers (airlines) care what the public thinks.
  - magduf 7y ago
    Consumers mostly don't care about the brand of gasoline, only the convenience and price of the gas station. Gasoline is all the same; Exxon gas isn't significantly different from Sunoco or BP gas. Boeing doesn't sell to consumers. As I said above, this just isn't a valid comparison at all.