3 ms·

Then there are a lot of companies you won't be buying products from. IBM did work for the Nazis. Popular Japanese car companies made fighter planes used at Pear

by jm4 6y ago

Then there are a lot of companies you won't be buying products from. IBM did work for the Nazis. Popular Japanese car companies made fighter planes used at Pearl Harbor. American auto companies sympathized with Nazis. Household brands that make the food we eat or the medicines we take have produced poisons that have killed many, produced drugs that have ravaged communities, and much more. The things Nestle does are unconscionable. Goodbye water and chocolate. If you've ever had food at a stadium or a cup of coffee at an office then you've probably consumed a product made by Aramark which is known to engage in modern day slavery in U.S. prisons. What about Exxon or BP? Or that TV network in the UK that employed a known pedophile on a kids show? We could go on all day enumerating all the misdeeds companies have committed in the past or are still committing today. If Microsoft bankrolling the SCO lawsuits is the stand you want to take then be my guest. It was almost 20 years ago, the entire leadership of the company has changed, their culture has changed, and they are pretty much unrecognizable at this point.

whatshisface 6y ago
I think you're overstating the difficulty of avoiding those companies, at least if you're a reasonably affluent software engineer. I definitely don't do any business with IBM and I'd kill it if it came up at work because IBM is not that great. Weapons production is not that big a deal to me but I happen to not own a Mitsubishi or whatever so I get that one for free. I don't buy bottled water from Nestle and frankly they are pretty bad at making chocolate. I don't buy that nasty office brand coffee either. I don't watch a lot of TV, and I avoid drugs and the medical system as much as I can, by trying to live healthily. So, I'm already "boycotting" almost every company you listed, without even needing any ideological goal to chase after. The fact is these giant evil mega-conglomerates aren't that great at making things. The more you avoid them the better off you will be. Now, everything is connected to everything else, so I think the following rules are reasonable for avoiding evil companies: - If it's a commodity, and it's mixed in with all the other commodities, it's probably not practical to separate the tainted stuff from the cleanly produced stuff. - If it's a specific company with a specific product that they have specifically done evil stuff to push, that's an example of something to avoid. - If the same people are in power as when the company was evil, it's probably still evil. If everything but the name has changed maybe they can get another chance. For degrees of change in-between those two, use your judgement.
jacquesm 6y ago
Nadella worked there during that period. He joined the company in 1992, when it was as bad as it got and did not see any reason to go work somewhere else. He was totally free to pack up and go but choose to hold on and continued to work there all the way up to today. That makes him at a minimum a silent supporter and at worst complicit. Neither of these speak well for his ethics.
- verst 6y ago
  You assume Nadella had the choice to switch companies freely. You have to keep in mind what it is like to be an immigrant in this country. Nadella gave up his Greencard to switch to the H-1B program in 1994 to bring his wife to the US (and surely this unprecedented switch was some time in the making). Subsequently he relied on Microsoft to sponsor him once again for permanent residency. In that situation no immigrants switches employers regardless of their ethics. It often isn't even possible to make such a switch.
- jm4 6y ago
  And he's the guy who eventually turned it around. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think it's a little silly to write them off over old stuff that they're no longer engaged in when there are bigger fish to fry. They are making pretty good products these days and, by all appearances, are one of the better players in big tech these days. I hated Microsoft back then too. They were about as bad as I thought a company could be. At least until I lived long enough to see Amazon, Google and Facebook - or learned about the horrible things other household brands have done.

by jm4 6y ago

whatshisface 6y ago

I think you're overstating the difficulty of avoiding those companies, at least if you're a reasonably affluent software engineer. I definitely don't do any business with IBM and I'd kill it if it came up at work because IBM is not that great. Weapons production is not that big a deal to me but I happen to not own a Mitsubishi or whatever so I get that one for free. I don't buy bottled water from Nestle and frankly they are pretty bad at making chocolate. I don't buy that nasty office brand coffee either. I don't watch a lot of TV, and I avoid drugs and the medical system as much as I can, by trying to live healthily. So, I'm already "boycotting" almost every company you listed, without even needing any ideological goal to chase after. The fact is these giant evil mega-conglomerates aren't that great at making things. The more you avoid them the better off you will be. Now, everything is connected to everything else, so I think the following rules are reasonable for avoiding evil companies: - If it's a commodity, and it's mixed in with all the other commodities, it's probably not practical to separate the tainted stuff from the cleanly produced stuff. - If it's a specific company with a specific product that they have specifically done evil stuff to push, that's an example of something to avoid. - If the same people are in power as when the company was evil, it's probably still evil. If everything but the name has changed maybe they can get another chance. For degrees of change in-between those two, use your judgement.

jacquesm 6y ago

Nadella worked there during that period. He joined the company in 1992, when it was as bad as it got and did not see any reason to go work somewhere else. He was totally free to pack up and go but choose to hold on and continued to work there all the way up to today. That makes him at a minimum a silent supporter and at worst complicit. Neither of these speak well for his ethics.

verst 6y ago
You assume Nadella had the choice to switch companies freely. You have to keep in mind what it is like to be an immigrant in this country. Nadella gave up his Greencard to switch to the H-1B program in 1994 to bring his wife to the US (and surely this unprecedented switch was some time in the making). Subsequently he relied on Microsoft to sponsor him once again for permanent residency. In that situation no immigrants switches employers regardless of their ethics. It often isn't even possible to make such a switch.
jm4 6y ago
And he's the guy who eventually turned it around. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think it's a little silly to write them off over old stuff that they're no longer engaged in when there are bigger fish to fry. They are making pretty good products these days and, by all appearances, are one of the better players in big tech these days. I hated Microsoft back then too. They were about as bad as I thought a company could be. At least until I lived long enough to see Amazon, Google and Facebook - or learned about the horrible things other household brands have done.