5 ms·

So true! Anonymous masses vs private fiefdoms. Almost everything commercially successful is run by tyrants. I wish regulating anti-social behaviour out of indu

So true! Anonymous masses vs private fiefdoms. Almost everything commercially successful is run by tyrants. I wish regulating anti-social behaviour out of industry was more popular.

ericmay 6y ago
The main issue is identifying what anti-social behavior is. It's easy to say "coal is anti-social! don't you care about the environment!", but it's just as anti-social to just shut down an industry and say "best of luck, I heard you can move to California and build websites in JavaScript". Often times there just aren't easy answers. I also want to push back on "everything commercially successful is run by tyrants" kind of narrative. I get the frustration, but these blanket, ideological statements do not help anyone, anywhere. Do you make money? I guess you're a tyrant! Let's not forget, the countries that we put up on a pedestal as the shining examples of how a country should be run (Norway or whatever) are very much capitalistic countries with free markets, IPOs, and commercial companies. I hardly see businesses there characterized as tyrannical. I do really get the frustration, but it needs to be directed at the failures of our elected representatives. Not, commercial entities.
- bigmanwalter 6y ago
  The tyrannical boss is a classic trope due to the necessities of competition. Companies are unlikely to stay profitable if they’re overly generous. They need to profit handsomely to survive.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    > The tyrannical boss is a classic trope due to the necessities of competition. Eh, I think that’s kind of old-school thinking. > Companies are unlikely to stay profitable if they’re overly generous. They need to profit handsomely to survive. Yep. That’s fine. (Also ignores low-margin industries that rely on volume, but whatever). If you want a modern society, people have to be able to take risks with their money in order to make more money. Otherwise we can go back to subsistence farming. Do you work? You’re charging a profit. How evil of you! Being a few steps removed from the transaction doesn’t make you any less guilty of profiteering. You’re just as bad as these tyrannical CEOs, the difference is you’re a sucker for building their product while they make money hand over fist. (I don’t actually believe the last part, but w/e).
WalterBright 6y ago
> Almost everything commercially successful is run by tyrants. Sounds like you're simply defining a tyrant as someone who runs a profitable company.

So true! Anonymous masses vs private fiefdoms. Almost everything commercially successful is run by tyrants. I wish regulating anti-social behaviour out of industry was more popular.

ericmay 6y ago

The main issue is identifying what anti-social behavior is. It's easy to say "coal is anti-social! don't you care about the environment!", but it's just as anti-social to just shut down an industry and say "best of luck, I heard you can move to California and build websites in JavaScript". Often times there just aren't easy answers. I also want to push back on "everything commercially successful is run by tyrants" kind of narrative. I get the frustration, but these blanket, ideological statements do not help anyone, anywhere. Do you make money? I guess you're a tyrant! Let's not forget, the countries that we put up on a pedestal as the shining examples of how a country should be run (Norway or whatever) are very much capitalistic countries with free markets, IPOs, and commercial companies. I hardly see businesses there characterized as tyrannical. I do really get the frustration, but it needs to be directed at the failures of our elected representatives. Not, commercial entities.

bigmanwalter 6y ago
The tyrannical boss is a classic trope due to the necessities of competition. Companies are unlikely to stay profitable if they’re overly generous. They need to profit handsomely to survive.
- ericmay 6y ago
  > The tyrannical boss is a classic trope due to the necessities of competition. Eh, I think that’s kind of old-school thinking. > Companies are unlikely to stay profitable if they’re overly generous. They need to profit handsomely to survive. Yep. That’s fine. (Also ignores low-margin industries that rely on volume, but whatever). If you want a modern society, people have to be able to take risks with their money in order to make more money. Otherwise we can go back to subsistence farming. Do you work? You’re charging a profit. How evil of you! Being a few steps removed from the transaction doesn’t make you any less guilty of profiteering. You’re just as bad as these tyrannical CEOs, the difference is you’re a sucker for building their product while they make money hand over fist. (I don’t actually believe the last part, but w/e).

WalterBright 6y ago

> Almost everything commercially successful is run by tyrants. Sounds like you're simply defining a tyrant as someone who runs a profitable company.