6 ms·

Interesting that you're getting downvoted with a comment that touches on the core of capitalism, or at least points out one of its main pitfalls.

by spurgu 6y ago

djsumdog 6y ago
It doesn't really add anything to this conversation. "Blame Capitalism" is all the rave, but it doesn't really fit with this argument. There is a lot going on here. One, this is a letter to Facebook when it really seems to be the contracting agency that's at issue. FB may just order their contractors to be like "stop this shit" and they comply, or they buy out the contract and move people in-house. People only have so much time and capacities. A software engineer isn't going to spend a lot of time on the sales room floor, but they might have started off in help-desk support. A CEO might not know what goes on in the warehouse, but he or she may have worked at a McDonalds growing up. If someone hasn't worked entry level jobs elsewhere, would working on the factory really develop empathy? Would that change policy? Probably not. It's so easy to make two boxes, one for the oppressor and the other for the oppressed, and place everyone into those two boxes. If each oppressor works a day in the shoes of the other box, does that make a difference? If the workers throw their wrenches into the gears and seize the means of production, what if they're completely unprepared to keep that machine moving and end up with famine? The issues are complex, much more complex than "Before you get your license, you should have to ride a bike on the streets for two weeks."
- dao- 6y ago
  > It's so easy to make two boxes, one for the oppressor and the other for the oppressed, and place everyone into those two boxes. If each oppressor works a day in the shoes of the other box, does that make a difference? You've got a point there. The capitalist will most likely continue to act as a capitalist. The incentives are fundamentally wrong, so moralizing on an individual level won't do much, which brings us back to: blame capitalism.
- hypervisorxxx 6y ago
  Zuckerberg has been to trial in washington and had to speak about AI approaches. This is not the first second or third time international news has been made making objective statements about the technical failures of the product facebook is wants it's moderators to use. To say he has not been made aware and had the opportunity to address these issues over years is giving him too much credit. Blame capitalism is all the rave. So are companies hiding from responsibility. Shell companies shell companies to evade responsibility and incing their companies on remote islands they clearly don't primarily operate on to evade taxes and giving abuses NDAs which effectively offer full silence regardless of any federal felonies committed or else they take severence or healthcare taken away. Companies can do whatever they want under an NDA and sue anyone to the point even if they did something very illegal, they still wouldn't be liable because the fact that someone spoke about it is illegal in the same way a VC investor was caught beating a woman 300 times in a row as she tried to escape the guys san Francisco mansion but the evidence was thrown out because it was obtained illegally and he got a $500 fine instead. Blame capitalism exists because publicly shaming companies away from egregious abuses even to the point of being often illegal is the only way to have some type of check and balance and it always takes a few people beginning by speaking out and losing their jobs and getting nothing for it before the masses come to agreement and hold companies responsible for better practices. Unfortunately this is not just a fun trend. It's a reaction that attempts to check and balance abuses and it often only happens after many yrs and many people have gone silent and a few have chosen to take the risk and speak out. We should definitely have something better than blame capitalism but to say it just appeared out of the blue is a bit misleading.
falcolas 6y ago
Capitalism does not force you to create an immoral business, or to treat your employees (direct and contracted) immorally. It doesn't even really encourage it. Wanting more and more money regardless of the (human) cost does.
- dao- 6y ago
  > Capitalism does not force you to create an immoral business, or to treat your employees (direct and contracted) immorally. It doesn't even really encourage it. It tends to encourage it by putting those at the top who manage to exploit the most. Capital also begets political power which makes it hard to counter that trend. > Wanting more and more money regardless of the (human) cost Congratulations, you've accidentally defined capitalism.
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    I'd argue that most alternative political systems are responsible for a lot more wasted resource and cost...
    - ckocagil 6y ago
      False dichotomy. Economic systems contain hundreds of sliders a country can adjust, from various tax rates to workers' rights. Adjusting one of these has nothing to do with Stalin's USSR or Mao's China, so I don't understand why you're bringing those up.
      - Karunamon 6y ago
        Because when you slag off "capitalism", the next question is "what else?", and history shows the alternatives are worse.
        ako 6y ago
        I disagree, e.g, europe, not pure capitalism, not pure communism, not pure socialism, but somewhere in between (depending no country). Overall these countries are not less successful than US (which is also not pure capitalism), and most of it citizen prefer living in europe and would not consider moving to the US. More socialised forms of healthcare, education and unemployement support are main reasons.

Interesting that you're getting downvoted with a comment that touches on the core of capitalism, or at least points out one of its main pitfalls.

by spurgu 6y ago

Interesting that you're getting downvoted with a comment that touches on the core of capitalism, or at least points out one of its main pitfalls.

djsumdog 6y ago

It doesn't really add anything to this conversation. "Blame Capitalism" is all the rave, but it doesn't really fit with this argument. There is a lot going on here. One, this is a letter to Facebook when it really seems to be the contracting agency that's at issue. FB may just order their contractors to be like "stop this shit" and they comply, or they buy out the contract and move people in-house. People only have so much time and capacities. A software engineer isn't going to spend a lot of time on the sales room floor, but they might have started off in help-desk support. A CEO might not know what goes on in the warehouse, but he or she may have worked at a McDonalds growing up. If someone hasn't worked entry level jobs elsewhere, would working on the factory really develop empathy? Would that change policy? Probably not. It's so easy to make two boxes, one for the oppressor and the other for the oppressed, and place everyone into those two boxes. If each oppressor works a day in the shoes of the other box, does that make a difference? If the workers throw their wrenches into the gears and seize the means of production, what if they're completely unprepared to keep that machine moving and end up with famine? The issues are complex, much more complex than "Before you get your license, you should have to ride a bike on the streets for two weeks."

dao- 6y ago
> It's so easy to make two boxes, one for the oppressor and the other for the oppressed, and place everyone into those two boxes. If each oppressor works a day in the shoes of the other box, does that make a difference? You've got a point there. The capitalist will most likely continue to act as a capitalist. The incentives are fundamentally wrong, so moralizing on an individual level won't do much, which brings us back to: blame capitalism.
hypervisorxxx 6y ago
Zuckerberg has been to trial in washington and had to speak about AI approaches. This is not the first second or third time international news has been made making objective statements about the technical failures of the product facebook is wants it's moderators to use. To say he has not been made aware and had the opportunity to address these issues over years is giving him too much credit. Blame capitalism is all the rave. So are companies hiding from responsibility. Shell companies shell companies to evade responsibility and incing their companies on remote islands they clearly don't primarily operate on to evade taxes and giving abuses NDAs which effectively offer full silence regardless of any federal felonies committed or else they take severence or healthcare taken away. Companies can do whatever they want under an NDA and sue anyone to the point even if they did something very illegal, they still wouldn't be liable because the fact that someone spoke about it is illegal in the same way a VC investor was caught beating a woman 300 times in a row as she tried to escape the guys san Francisco mansion but the evidence was thrown out because it was obtained illegally and he got a $500 fine instead. Blame capitalism exists because publicly shaming companies away from egregious abuses even to the point of being often illegal is the only way to have some type of check and balance and it always takes a few people beginning by speaking out and losing their jobs and getting nothing for it before the masses come to agreement and hold companies responsible for better practices. Unfortunately this is not just a fun trend. It's a reaction that attempts to check and balance abuses and it often only happens after many yrs and many people have gone silent and a few have chosen to take the risk and speak out. We should definitely have something better than blame capitalism but to say it just appeared out of the blue is a bit misleading.

falcolas 6y ago

Capitalism does not force you to create an immoral business, or to treat your employees (direct and contracted) immorally. It doesn't even really encourage it. Wanting more and more money regardless of the (human) cost does.

dao- 6y ago
> Capitalism does not force you to create an immoral business, or to treat your employees (direct and contracted) immorally. It doesn't even really encourage it. It tends to encourage it by putting those at the top who manage to exploit the most. Capital also begets political power which makes it hard to counter that trend. > Wanting more and more money regardless of the (human) cost Congratulations, you've accidentally defined capitalism.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  I'd argue that most alternative political systems are responsible for a lot more wasted resource and cost...
  - ckocagil 6y ago
    False dichotomy. Economic systems contain hundreds of sliders a country can adjust, from various tax rates to workers' rights. Adjusting one of these has nothing to do with Stalin's USSR or Mao's China, so I don't understand why you're bringing those up.
    - Karunamon 6y ago
      Because when you slag off "capitalism", the next question is "what else?", and history shows the alternatives are worse.
      - ako 6y ago
        I disagree, e.g, europe, not pure capitalism, not pure communism, not pure socialism, but somewhere in between (depending no country). Overall these countries are not less successful than US (which is also not pure capitalism), and most of it citizen prefer living in europe and would not consider moving to the US. More socialised forms of healthcare, education and unemployement support are main reasons.