3 ms·
It seems incredibly risky for the bottom line and unwise to make such politically risky moves against half the US people. The action seem to assume that the rei
by asabjorn 7y ago
It seems incredibly risky for the bottom line and unwise to make such politically risky moves against half the US people. The action seem to assume that the reigning silicon valley ideologies are 1) right and 2) will win.
By assuming corporate and regional dominance will last through violating some peoples trust in favor of placating others desire for power, it is just a matter of time before you open up a weakness that someone elsewhere can exploit. Or as they said in Detroit: "People will still need cars". To which you can answer "Yes, but that doesn't matter if you loose your competitive edge"
- maehwasu 7y ago“Corporations” are useful abstractions, but leaky. Google exists as a collection of people, most of whom are shielded from the profit motive. It’s also not terribly controversial to note that, on average, Google employees don’t like that other half of the US people. The upshot: it’s not very hard for a corporation to end up doing things that are right or good for the members, but bad for the corporation’s survival.
- asabjorn 7y agoYes, but the trust and safety team that per the Veritas video enforce the political agenda unto the user base are departments and therefore there as part of normal operation. These are not vigilantes operating on their own.