6 ms·

I see it not as a subsidy but more of an insurance premium. We all put in a little bit of extra effort in exchange for not being royally screwed if it happens t

I see it not as a subsidy but more of an insurance premium. We all put in a little bit of extra effort in exchange for not being royally screwed if it happens to us. The progress of civilization seems to go hand-in-hand with these sorts of arrangements. That's probably because there are so many ways to be royally screwed that, if we didn't look out for each other, everyone would be screwed in one way or another. But there needs to be economic incentives for this to work (and regulation is an economic incentive). Asking a business to be altruistic is like asking a bear to not eat your trash.

patio11 15y ago
Asking a business to be altruistic is like asking a bear to not eat your trash. I get kinda annoyed by Capitalism Means Being A Heartless Bastard, because it doesn't. Businesses are routinely altruistic for the same reason that businesses are routinely greedy: like soylent green, they're made out of people.
- extension 15y ago
  And I'm sure the author of the article routinely encounters perfectly accessible web sites, but charity is not something we can rely on at scale, nor can we rely on there being some person who feels responsible for everything every business does or doesn't do. I don't think the most important social progress happens spontaneously.
- wisty 15y ago
  Microsoft, which seems to do decently, is said to make most stuff accessible. Of course, their commitment to doing stuff right (right = no bugs, no compatibility issues, secure, tested, fully I18N and accessible), even at the cost of a bit of agility (and a lot of developer time) is part of what made them successful. OK MS does screw up, but much less than pretty much everyone else they have competed with. Google, Sun, post-Jobs's-return Apple, and Canonical are also good at doing stuff right.
  - alanh 15y ago
    I'm mostly with you, but how can you say Google is boot st this stuff when many of their products aren't accessible or don't work in Opera?
- Confusion 15y ago
  That ignores the fact that some of those people, usually the ones in power, are either heartless bastards or, more often, sufficiently involved in making the company succeed to forego altruism. Making sure your employees keep their jobs often counts for more than being kind to strangers. However, there is another way in which capitalism makes things better: it does its best to find markets for everything. For instance, Unilever sells very small packages of washing powder in India, which is optimized to be used in rivers. Previously, people in India did not have access to washing powder (the regular large packages were too expensive and the stuff wasn't very useful in the river). Now they have access to washing powder, which improves hygiene. However, instructions on packages of washing powder are not printed in braille.
  - waitwhat 15y ago
    Previously, people in India did not have access to washing powder [...] Now they have access to washing powder, which improves hygiene. What an awful example. Before washing powder, people used a bar of wash soap: cheaper, more convenient, purpose-designed and doesn't come in single-use packages encouraging you to use more than you need. (Wash soap also does a much better job than any powder I have tried when hand-washing, although YMMV.) This sounds like a classic case of a large corporation's marketing department convincing people to buy a product that is more expensive and no better (and possibly worse) than what they currently have. For the definitive example of this, see Nestle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott#The_baby_milk_issue http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott#The_baby_mi...
    - Confusion 15y ago
      I don't think an explanation involving 'YMMV' and 'sounds like' is a sufficient support for your opening statement that it is 'an awful example'. They have simply entered a market with a competing product. Unless you have evidence that their product is inferior to competing solutions and that they know it, but intend to overcome that problem by outmarketing the competition, then you really don't have any support for your position. Nestle has nothing to do with it until then.
- pessimizer 15y ago
  Businesses aren't made of people any more than they are made of bricks or telephones. Businesses employ people, and are owned by people. Assuming that businesses will be nice because they are largely composed of humans isn't any more reasonable than assuming that they will stink because they are composed of garbage cans.
gaius 15y ago
I see it not as a subsidy but more of an insurance premium. Indeed, we're all going to get old. Being "able-bodied" is fleeting; enjoy it while it lasts.

patio11 15y ago

Asking a business to be altruistic is like asking a bear to not eat your trash. I get kinda annoyed by Capitalism Means Being A Heartless Bastard, because it doesn't. Businesses are routinely altruistic for the same reason that businesses are routinely greedy: like soylent green, they're made out of people.

extension 15y ago
And I'm sure the author of the article routinely encounters perfectly accessible web sites, but charity is not something we can rely on at scale, nor can we rely on there being some person who feels responsible for everything every business does or doesn't do. I don't think the most important social progress happens spontaneously.
wisty 15y ago
Microsoft, which seems to do decently, is said to make most stuff accessible. Of course, their commitment to doing stuff right (right = no bugs, no compatibility issues, secure, tested, fully I18N and accessible), even at the cost of a bit of agility (and a lot of developer time) is part of what made them successful. OK MS does screw up, but much less than pretty much everyone else they have competed with. Google, Sun, post-Jobs's-return Apple, and Canonical are also good at doing stuff right.
- alanh 15y ago
  I'm mostly with you, but how can you say Google is boot st this stuff when many of their products aren't accessible or don't work in Opera?
Confusion 15y ago
That ignores the fact that some of those people, usually the ones in power, are either heartless bastards or, more often, sufficiently involved in making the company succeed to forego altruism. Making sure your employees keep their jobs often counts for more than being kind to strangers. However, there is another way in which capitalism makes things better: it does its best to find markets for everything. For instance, Unilever sells very small packages of washing powder in India, which is optimized to be used in rivers. Previously, people in India did not have access to washing powder (the regular large packages were too expensive and the stuff wasn't very useful in the river). Now they have access to washing powder, which improves hygiene. However, instructions on packages of washing powder are not printed in braille.
- waitwhat 15y ago
  Previously, people in India did not have access to washing powder [...] Now they have access to washing powder, which improves hygiene. What an awful example. Before washing powder, people used a bar of wash soap: cheaper, more convenient, purpose-designed and doesn't come in single-use packages encouraging you to use more than you need. (Wash soap also does a much better job than any powder I have tried when hand-washing, although YMMV.) This sounds like a classic case of a large corporation's marketing department convincing people to buy a product that is more expensive and no better (and possibly worse) than what they currently have. For the definitive example of this, see Nestle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott#The_baby_milk_issue http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott#The_baby_mi...
  - Confusion 15y ago
    I don't think an explanation involving 'YMMV' and 'sounds like' is a sufficient support for your opening statement that it is 'an awful example'. They have simply entered a market with a competing product. Unless you have evidence that their product is inferior to competing solutions and that they know it, but intend to overcome that problem by outmarketing the competition, then you really don't have any support for your position. Nestle has nothing to do with it until then.
pessimizer 15y ago
Businesses aren't made of people any more than they are made of bricks or telephones. Businesses employ people, and are owned by people. Assuming that businesses will be nice because they are largely composed of humans isn't any more reasonable than assuming that they will stink because they are composed of garbage cans.

gaius 15y ago

I see it not as a subsidy but more of an insurance premium. Indeed, we're all going to get old. Being "able-bodied" is fleeting; enjoy it while it lasts.