6 ms·

An apology from a publicly traded capitalist corporation can never hold any meaning anyway. Literally everything they do is designed to maximize profit at the e

An apology from a publicly traded capitalist corporation can never hold any meaning anyway. Literally everything they do is designed to maximize profit at the expense of anything else. If Microsoft had a magic box with a button on it that said "If you press this, ten million innocent people will die, but nobody will ever find out and the company will make a dollar for every one" they would have a legal obligation to their shareholders to press it. A corporation can't do something, people do things. Nobody at Microsoft cares they put out surveillance software, they just estimated their was enough outrage that pulling it was more profitable than leaving it out.

richardwhiuk 6y ago
That's a fiction.
- carapace 6y ago
  The "legal obligation" is fictive, but corporations infamously do these things. E.g. Ralph Nader: > Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile is a landmark non-fiction book by consumer advocate Ralph Nader, first published in 1965. Its central theme charged car manufacturers of resistance to the introduction of safety features (such as seat belts), and their general reluctance to spend money on improving safety. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed Check out what GM did: > In response to Nader's criticisms, GM attempted to sabotage Nader's reputation. It "(1) conducted a series of interviews with acquaintances of the plaintiff, 'questioning them about, and casting aspersions upon [his] political, social, racial and religious views; his integrity; his sexual proclivities and inclinations; and his personal habits'; (2) kept him under surveillance in public places for an unreasonable length of time; (3) caused him to be accosted by girls for the purpose of entrapping him into illicit relationships; (4) made threatening, harassing and obnoxious telephone calls to him; (5) tapped his telephone and eavesdropped, by means of mechanical and electronic equipment, on his private conversations with others; and (6) conducted a 'continuing' and harassing investigation of him."[12] > On March 22, 1966, GM President James Roche was forced to appear before a United States Senate subcommittee and apologized to Nader for the company's campaign of harassment and intimidation. Nader sued GM in November 1966 for invasion of privacy.[12][10] He won the case on appeal in January 1970 and was awarded $425,000, which he used to establish the Center for Auto Safety, a non-profit advocacy group. He went on to lobby for consumer rights, helping drive the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Air Act, among others.[13] You can't make this stuff up!
  - skohan 6y ago
    Yes it may not be a legal obligation, but there's probably no better way to dependably predict corporate behavior than to consider profit motive/investor ROI.

richardwhiuk 6y ago

That's a fiction.

carapace 6y ago
The "legal obligation" is fictive, but corporations infamously do these things. E.g. Ralph Nader: > Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile is a landmark non-fiction book by consumer advocate Ralph Nader, first published in 1965. Its central theme charged car manufacturers of resistance to the introduction of safety features (such as seat belts), and their general reluctance to spend money on improving safety. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed Check out what GM did: > In response to Nader's criticisms, GM attempted to sabotage Nader's reputation. It "(1) conducted a series of interviews with acquaintances of the plaintiff, 'questioning them about, and casting aspersions upon [his] political, social, racial and religious views; his integrity; his sexual proclivities and inclinations; and his personal habits'; (2) kept him under surveillance in public places for an unreasonable length of time; (3) caused him to be accosted by girls for the purpose of entrapping him into illicit relationships; (4) made threatening, harassing and obnoxious telephone calls to him; (5) tapped his telephone and eavesdropped, by means of mechanical and electronic equipment, on his private conversations with others; and (6) conducted a 'continuing' and harassing investigation of him."[12] > On March 22, 1966, GM President James Roche was forced to appear before a United States Senate subcommittee and apologized to Nader for the company's campaign of harassment and intimidation. Nader sued GM in November 1966 for invasion of privacy.[12][10] He won the case on appeal in January 1970 and was awarded $425,000, which he used to establish the Center for Auto Safety, a non-profit advocacy group. He went on to lobby for consumer rights, helping drive the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Air Act, among others.[13] You can't make this stuff up!
- skohan 6y ago
  Yes it may not be a legal obligation, but there's probably no better way to dependably predict corporate behavior than to consider profit motive/investor ROI.