3 ms·

This is probably due to incompetence, not malice. Bugfix a'hoy? They probably meant "It is our intention not to collect information..." rather than "Microsoft

by palish 15y ago

This is probably due to incompetence, not malice. Bugfix a'hoy? They probably meant "It is our intention not to collect information..." rather than "Microsoft does not collect information..." If you make a mistake which contradicts something you've said in a formal contract, is there any way to basically say "Whoops, my bad, yo. We're pushing out a bugfix ASAP"? Would that even 'matter'? I guess it depends entirely on the exact contract, so there's probably no way to answer that. I mean, people make mistakes. It's life; it happens. I'm just wondering if the legal system reflects that fact at all, or whether it's a hardcore stonefaced slavedriver that laughs at how naive you are for thinking you get a second chance.

anedisi 15y ago
there is a lot of this type of "mistakes" if i would let my imagination to take over i could say they do it on purpose and say it is mistake only if they get caught.
- palish 15y ago
  That's true, but very rare.
  - rwolf 15y ago
    Citation needed.
    - palish 15y ago
      Do you believe most of the world is honorless? If so, then no citation will convince otherwise. On the other hand, if you believe most people are fundamentally "good" (or at least "mostly not evil"), as I do, then no citation is necessary. Almost everyone of the thousands of people I've interacted with in the tech/programming field are good people. Of course, there are plenty of horror stories in relation to the business side of things. It's certainly possible most of them are mostly evil; I have no clue.
      - rwolf 15y ago
        You may have meant to talk about humans in general, but the context here is Microsoft. Your claim that Microsoft has very rarely acted against the interests of users on purpose is in need of supporting evidence, as the general sentiment on this social news site is that this is not the case. To your question: Steve Mann has some interesting thoughts about how being a part of bureaucracy makes it easy to do evil. This is not a new idea: any discussion of collaboration in WW2 Europe will bring up similar themes. Do you think humans who are acting at the behest of an impersonal corporation are intrinsically good in that context?

by palish 15y ago

anedisi 15y ago

there is a lot of this type of "mistakes" if i would let my imagination to take over i could say they do it on purpose and say it is mistake only if they get caught.

palish 15y ago
That's true, but very rare.
- rwolf 15y ago
  Citation needed.
  - palish 15y ago
    Do you believe most of the world is honorless? If so, then no citation will convince otherwise. On the other hand, if you believe most people are fundamentally "good" (or at least "mostly not evil"), as I do, then no citation is necessary. Almost everyone of the thousands of people I've interacted with in the tech/programming field are good people. Of course, there are plenty of horror stories in relation to the business side of things. It's certainly possible most of them are mostly evil; I have no clue.
    - rwolf 15y ago
      You may have meant to talk about humans in general, but the context here is Microsoft. Your claim that Microsoft has very rarely acted against the interests of users on purpose is in need of supporting evidence, as the general sentiment on this social news site is that this is not the case. To your question: Steve Mann has some interesting thoughts about how being a part of bureaucracy makes it easy to do evil. This is not a new idea: any discussion of collaboration in WW2 Europe will bring up similar themes. Do you think humans who are acting at the behest of an impersonal corporation are intrinsically good in that context?