4 ms·

> satisfied users of a product LOL. Do you have a business listed on google? I'm yet to meet satisfied owners to be honest. For example: I rent a room for cla

by pmlnr 5y ago

> satisfied users of a product LOL. Do you have a business listed on google? I'm yet to meet satisfied owners to be honest. For example: I rent a room for classes weekly, and I have no google sanction way to show that on the map, because I don't own the business location itself. All the structured data, the rich result, etc stuff from google is a mirage, and despite the fact the I can hand write the correct JSON-LD they want, it doesn't even make a dent in the search results.

kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
Sure, I also know people who have huge problems with their Google business listing. Nevertheless it is normal for a company to call its users to aid against government regulation that would harm the product. What other course of action would you propose for a company? Just give up and donate their business to the communist party? If most users are unhappy with the product, it just means they will be unlikely to follow the call for action, which makes it even less of an issue to worry about. What makes the article even more ridiculous, however, is calling on the statements by Yelp as witness for the evilness of Google. Yelp is actually known for shady business practices (asking for bribes to have bad reviews removed).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  > What other course of action would you propose for a company? Just give up and donate their business to the communist party? just because businesses fight regulation, doesn't mean they're morally in the right. Car companies fought seatbelt regulation for years. They also convinced their users/drivers that this was operating in their best interests and tried to get them on-side to fight said regulation.
  - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
    "ust because businesses fight regulation, doesn't mean they're morally in the right." True, but they are also not automatically not morally in the right. The article cites "they oppose government regulation" as proof that they are evil, which is nonsense. There are many evil governments in the world, which to oppose would be the morally right thing to do. And many proposed legislations in the US are evil, too.
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      true, but regulations are primarily bad when corporations capture their regulators and use them to shut out competition. Which is once again the corporations doing something immoral. There's a whole issue with ineffective or overreaching regulations too, but that's bog standard incompetence rather than malice. Could you give an example of a regulation in the US that is straightforwardly evil? Generally speaking when I think of evils propagated by government I think of wars/colonialism, oppressive social policies and benefitting businesses at the cost of citizens' wellbeing. The US does all of these in varying degrees but I'm curious as to how the US is actually oppressing its corporations; from my perspective, the US seems like the most corporation-friendly country on the planet.
      - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
        Well this could be an endless discussion, but in my opinion all legislations that moves society towards socialism is fundamentally evil. I'm sure there are more specific examples to find, but to me, that overarching principle suffices. People are used to the leftist way of thinking about "us vs them" and automatically think of corporations and "employers" as evil oppressors. I think the other way round. I think "workers" are just a social construct, and being able to start your own business is the very means to achieve freedom. So regulations destroying businesses are enemies of freedom and hence evil. For example my motivation to run my own business may be that I want to work the way I want. Now regulators perhaps give unions the right to determine how I am supposed to work. That's completely fucked up. The correct response to bad working conditions is for employees to quit and change jobs. If no good jobs exist, they should start their own business. People who crave socialist structures are free to start businesses with socialist structures. The correct way for governments to help out workers is therefore to facility opportunity and thriving economy that leads to more companies and hence more alternatives for being employed. Most legislation does the opposite of that. (another simple example: here in Europe we have to senselessly click on cookie banners thousands of times, because of a misguided regulation on cookies. Wasting people's energy like that is also evil. Worse, we will soon have upload filters, destroying freedom of speech for good, as "indie publishers" won't be able to afford the required infrastructure and legal teams).

by pmlnr 5y ago

kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago

Sure, I also know people who have huge problems with their Google business listing. Nevertheless it is normal for a company to call its users to aid against government regulation that would harm the product. What other course of action would you propose for a company? Just give up and donate their business to the communist party? If most users are unhappy with the product, it just means they will be unlikely to follow the call for action, which makes it even less of an issue to worry about. What makes the article even more ridiculous, however, is calling on the statements by Yelp as witness for the evilness of Google. Yelp is actually known for shady business practices (asking for bribes to have bad reviews removed).

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
beaconstudios 5y ago
> What other course of action would you propose for a company? Just give up and donate their business to the communist party? just because businesses fight regulation, doesn't mean they're morally in the right. Car companies fought seatbelt regulation for years. They also convinced their users/drivers that this was operating in their best interests and tried to get them on-side to fight said regulation.
- kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
  "ust because businesses fight regulation, doesn't mean they're morally in the right." True, but they are also not automatically not morally in the right. The article cites "they oppose government regulation" as proof that they are evil, which is nonsense. There are many evil governments in the world, which to oppose would be the morally right thing to do. And many proposed legislations in the US are evil, too.
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    true, but regulations are primarily bad when corporations capture their regulators and use them to shut out competition. Which is once again the corporations doing something immoral. There's a whole issue with ineffective or overreaching regulations too, but that's bog standard incompetence rather than malice. Could you give an example of a regulation in the US that is straightforwardly evil? Generally speaking when I think of evils propagated by government I think of wars/colonialism, oppressive social policies and benefitting businesses at the cost of citizens' wellbeing. The US does all of these in varying degrees but I'm curious as to how the US is actually oppressing its corporations; from my perspective, the US seems like the most corporation-friendly country on the planet.
    - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
      Well this could be an endless discussion, but in my opinion all legislations that moves society towards socialism is fundamentally evil. I'm sure there are more specific examples to find, but to me, that overarching principle suffices. People are used to the leftist way of thinking about "us vs them" and automatically think of corporations and "employers" as evil oppressors. I think the other way round. I think "workers" are just a social construct, and being able to start your own business is the very means to achieve freedom. So regulations destroying businesses are enemies of freedom and hence evil. For example my motivation to run my own business may be that I want to work the way I want. Now regulators perhaps give unions the right to determine how I am supposed to work. That's completely fucked up. The correct response to bad working conditions is for employees to quit and change jobs. If no good jobs exist, they should start their own business. People who crave socialist structures are free to start businesses with socialist structures. The correct way for governments to help out workers is therefore to facility opportunity and thriving economy that leads to more companies and hence more alternatives for being employed. Most legislation does the opposite of that. (another simple example: here in Europe we have to senselessly click on cookie banners thousands of times, because of a misguided regulation on cookies. Wasting people's energy like that is also evil. Worse, we will soon have upload filters, destroying freedom of speech for good, as "indie publishers" won't be able to afford the required infrastructure and legal teams).