16 ms·

Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. You aren't accepting t

Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. You aren't accepting to an industry, you are accepting to a hiring manager. And it's just rude to act this way. Exploding offers aren't great, and if you have a problem with them, then simply don't accept them. You miss some opportunities this way but you feel better when you look in the mirror. Regardless, as others have noted, Coinbase has some specific issues that aren't indicative of a broader industry probem. They seem to be handling this as well as can be expected given those problems.

whimsicalism 4y ago
There is basically no company that wouldn't rescind an offer if it made the difference between 1x profits and 1.5x profits. Why wouldn't I behave exactly the same way if another company offers me 1.5x the salary?
- throwaway5752 4y ago
  Because you are better than they are? edit: Since I can't delete my comment now, I just want to apologize that I read your message too quickly and missed the 50% salary difference part. Come on, there's ethical and then there is crazy, of course you leave and take the other offer if it's 50%, that's common sense and any hiring manager should understand it. But that's not really commonplace and you can handle it in a professionally ethical way.
  - w-j-w 4y ago
    Why? I am not dealing with a person. The ethical reasons for being honest don't extend to groups of people acting like psychopaths. Don't let profit driven corporations brand themselves as "family", or any other concept which deserves moral consideration.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    I don't see anything particularly wrong with either way, I guess. If they have to rescind offers to be a profitable business, so be it. Sometimes I will have to renege in exchange for working fewer years. I'm joining a business, not the Knights Templar.
  - thghtihadanacct 4y ago
    ... And how do I put 'better than they are' into my 401k?
  - giaour 4y ago
    If a relationship is bound by ethical principles on one side and a cold economic calculus on the other, it seems pretty clear which will be taken advantage of most often.
  - xmonkee 4y ago
    Listen, man. I am a hiring manager. People have reneged on accepted offers. It doesn't affect me personally at all. It's a bit annoying, but the real damage to real human beings is close to zero. OTOH, a company rescinding an offer to someone who accepted and probably quit their other job can be devastating. It happened to fried of mine very recently and their life is very stressful right now. You are definitely arguing on the wrong side of this.
toomuchtodo 4y ago
It’s just business. If walking away from a fresh offer and starting role is burning a bridge, let the burning bridge light your way. The business will not return the loyalty, and one is woefully naive if they believe the business will. Look no further than VCs telling founders to cut deep now. How’s that for reputation? You get the labor market you cultivate.
- throwaway5752 4y ago
  The world is not infinitely large, and this field definitely isn't. Bad reputations are hard to repair.
  - tempsy 4y ago
    This is like the definition of being scared into obedience.
    - throwaway5752 4y ago
      It is not obedience, not even close. It is highly empowering to act with the high ethical standards no matter what, because it's always in your control. That doesn't mean being acquiescent or being naive. I don't tolerated being mistreated or lied to, but I don't reply in kind: I just leave, I don't come back, and I don't forget.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        Funnily enough, this whole discussion thread is about whether it is unethical or not to "just leave" and "don't come back."
  - 0des 4y ago
    > Bad reputations are hard to repair. I hear this a lot but the job market indicates the opposite. Given sufficient skill and availability everyone is hireable. In your world Jacob Applebaum is giving back rubs to Damore under a bridge somewhere pulling on two ends of a food stamp.
version_five 4y ago
My read of the root comment is "don't get tricked into thinking the company / manager cares about you and that you owe them something". No point in being naive and personally committing to a relationship that the other side is not committed to in the same way. It's not a question of ethics, it's a question of properly assessing the commitment that's being made
- snarfy 4y ago
  It's a good lesson. We spend most of our lives forming real bonds with humans. Corporations are not humans and interactions with them should not be treated as such.
- AussieWog93 4y ago
  >It's not a question of ethics, it's a question of properly assessing the commitment that's being made I've been on both ends of this, as an employee a few years ago and now an employer. I'm not sure if assuming the worst in all employers and putting in the bare minimum/acting unethically to avoid being "taken advantage of" is the optimal way to act. It pushes away the good companies that will reward loyalty and drive, and attracts unethical companies who have an adversarial relationship with their employees. Same goes for relationships - if you assume that the person you're going to marry is simply going to take your house and kids and build your relationship about minimising feeling stupid if/when it happens, you're not going to have a good time.
  - NeverFade 4y ago
    > It pushes away the good companies that will reward loyalty Which are these companies that "reward loyalty"? I can't name a single one in the US market. Every single company cares about one thing only: its bottom line. They will retain any employee as long as it's good for their bottom line. Once it's not: adios. I've never heard of a company retaining an employee due to their "loyalty". Maybe it was a thing in the previous century?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
lr4444lr 4y ago
Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. In general I agree with this, but the situation described usually happens when offers have expiry windows. I'm sorry, but a job offer is a major life step for me, and when a hiring manager frames it like a TV infomercial with a countdown timer, he's dealing on a lower moral plane. After all the time we both invested in this process, I don't deserve a slick sales maneuver. It's like how I would not stab anyone either, but when you raise a block of wood overhead and menace at me, it's self defense. I have my long term career arc to preserve, including opportunity costs: unsolicited hostile negotiating tactics thrown at me will meet a defense.
luckydata 4y ago
eh screw that. having ethics doesn't mean being stupid. I reserve my manners for people and organizations that deserve them.
jmull 4y ago
I have a general rule not to lie or deceive people. But when I play poker, I lie and deceive as well as I possibly can, without remorse or hesitation. That’s because lies and deception are part of the game. Likewise, when I engage in an employment relationship with a business, I play by those rules. It is complicated, and to a degree it certainly makes sense to act as though you have a commitment beyond what money paid has bought… but just like all companies do, when enough is at stake, you should recognize that it’s a business relationship and it may not be to your advantage to pretend a higher level of commitment exists between you than really does. It’s a tough call. Burning bridges you don’t have to is not good. Neither is playing the sucker for very long. Edit: Yikes, I should have presented my poker analogy differently to be more clear! Lying and deceit is good in poker, but definitely not in business, IMO. In business the rule is something like this: Pretend that every sentence making claims about the future ends with "... assuming, of course, we either have a signed contract to that effect or nothing significant changes between now and then." That goes for your own statements and the other party's. I think you will do well acting truthfully with those caveats assumed (and avoiding those that don't act truthfully within those caveats). A reply put it like this, which I like: present your "future-perfect-best self" and expect your employer/potential employer to do the same.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- bradlys 4y ago
  This is a great way to put it. Lying is 100% part of the game with employment. It continues even when you're still at the workplace. Are really people so asinine to believe that hiring managers aren't lying through their teeth the entire time they talk to you? I guess HN is full of people who are naive or have malicious intent. If anyone here thinks their manager truly cares about them (and you work in SV) - you're naive.
  - gumby 4y ago
    What is the incentive for a hiring manager to lie? What could they get from it?
adamsmith143 4y ago
Is this a joke? Companies have no qualms about rescinding offers for people who may have already quit their current job or who need a job for Visa purposes. >Coinbase has some specific issues that aren't indicative of a broader industry probem I have seen examples of this from several FAANG companies.
tcfunk 4y ago
This isn’t poor ethics it’s self care. No one cares if you back out of an offer. Companies are interviewing multiple candidates for a single spot, it’s insane not to expect reciprocal behavior
SheinhardtWigCo 4y ago
> You aren't accepting to an industry, you are accepting to a hiring manager. No, you are accepting to work for a business that is legally bound to prioritize the interests of the shareholders over those of any employee. They will always, always be "rude" to you if that's best for the people whose money they're spending to employ you.
- zrail 4y ago
  > legally bound to prioritize the interests of the shareholders over those of any employee I 100% agree with you on your broader point. That said, this is incorrect. There are no laws that stipulate a business must put shareholders above anything else. There _are_ laws that say employees get first dibs on accrued pay in the event of a bankruptcy, among other things that businesses must do on behalf of employees. Ref: https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co...
colordrops 4y ago
If your personal ethics are to give respect to those who respect you, it is not out of line with personal ethics to treat corporations and HR departments like the lying sociopaths that they are. And why would you hobble yourself into a disadvantage and even potentially take a multiyear hit to your life because you have some vague notion of objective ethics? That's just letting them take advantage of you. They bet on engineers thinking the game is not rigged.
tshaddox 4y ago
Of course the obvious followup question is: how long do you have to stay at the job before it becomes ethical to leave (for normal reasons like finding another more desirable job)? In jurisdictions with at-will employment (like California), most full-time jobs explicitly have no guarantees or commitments from either side about how long an employment offer will last. If your ethics are instead based on supposed implicit norms (like "it's rude to change your mind on a job offer" or "it's rude to leave your job before the recruiter/hiring manager gets their bonus" or whatever), then I think it's entirely reasonable to examine 1) whether those supposed norms actually even exist, 2) what the source of those norms are, and 3) whether those norms systematically favor one party over another.
pcwalton 4y ago
> You miss some opportunities this way but you feel better when you look in the mirror. Regardless, as others have noted, Coinbase has some specific issues that aren't indicative of a broader industry probem. They seem to be handling this as well as can be expected given those problems. I have a hard time reading this as anything other than "it's OK for companies to rescind agreements but not OK for employees to". Consistency requires that it's either acceptable for both employer and employee to do that, or unacceptable for both. (Personally, I lean toward the latter.)
scarface74 4y ago
A for profit business is not “someone”. It is a legal entity for which you are doing a financial transaction - trading labor for money.
jzb 4y ago
You’re not, though. You’re accepting to the company. The hiring manager may well quit or you may be reorg’ed at a moment’s notice to a new manager. I’ve been a hiring manager and I would be bummed if someone accepted and then took another offer, but this is their livelihood and their life we’re talking about. You do not owe nor are you owed fealty to the hiring manager or a company that may very well kick you to the curb at any time.
PheonixPharts 4y ago
Everyone on HN should own a copy of Max Stirner's "The Ego and It's Own". Ethics is a scam by the powerful to control everyone else. I don't love my kid because of ethics, I love my kid because I love my kid. I'm not kind to my annoying neighbor because "it's the right thing", I'm kind to my neighbor because, despite his being annoying, I appreciate his friendship. Ethics that you're advocating for exist so people running companies an take advantage of you, full stop. If it's more important for you to feel smugly superior, good for you, but I don't buy into it. I'd rather minimize how exploited I am. You don't have to buy into someone else's definition of "ethics" in order to life a full, happy life, which involves loving your community and being kind to your neighbor. The rejection of mainstream ethics doesn't mean you have to be a monster, it just mean you're going to stop being manipulated for the benefit of someone far more powerful then you who never even paused for a moment to consider ethics. edit: obviously I'm being a bit hyperbolic here. Spinoza and de Beauvoir both establish fairly exquisite ethical systems. But by en large "pop" ethics is a scam that is asymmetrically followed to the advantage of people in power. Quick example: Music companies want you to consider ethics when pirating music, but absolutely never bring up ethics when it comes to decisions around artists that could potentially increase profits.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Aaronstotle 4y ago
  Ethics encompasses a broad set of values, claiming the whole school of thought is a scam because you don't agree with a particular framework is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
- throwaway5752 4y ago
  I'm not talking about pop ethics, I'm talking about good old "golden rule" boring stuff. There is a tragedy of commons aspect to acting in this way, and I knowingly treat others like I would treat myself even doubting I'll get the benefit of reciprocity. You could say that I derive utility from it, and it's selfish? I could also shrug and say that I can't disprove that and what is the difference, at that point. I simply put myself in the shoes of the other person and ask, how would my decision make them feel? I may be even more selfish, in some interpretations, because I think that behaving this way impacts others, and pretty soon you have a culture of respect and empathy, which I think is good for everyone including myself. So I am acting towards my own benefit. I haven't read Stirner or Spinoza much, but it seems like common sense to behave ethically in the way that I've described. And maybe you have a point with Stirner regarding your later music piracy point, because I don't pirate music, and I don't do it for any reason other than I feel my integrity is worth more than any song. I don't care at all for the major labels' thoughts, I do it for "selfish" reasons and maybe it's egoism. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
outworlder 4y ago
> Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. Corporations are not people. They don't have ethics. The most they can have is an ethical culture or guidelines - which still doesn't preclude them from doing anything. The power imbalance is just too great. Don't be an as**, but don't be naive, either.
zrail 4y ago
There are no ethics in capitalism.

whimsicalism 4y ago

There is basically no company that wouldn't rescind an offer if it made the difference between 1x profits and 1.5x profits. Why wouldn't I behave exactly the same way if another company offers me 1.5x the salary?

throwaway5752 4y ago
Because you are better than they are? edit: Since I can't delete my comment now, I just want to apologize that I read your message too quickly and missed the 50% salary difference part. Come on, there's ethical and then there is crazy, of course you leave and take the other offer if it's 50%, that's common sense and any hiring manager should understand it. But that's not really commonplace and you can handle it in a professionally ethical way.
- w-j-w 4y ago
  Why? I am not dealing with a person. The ethical reasons for being honest don't extend to groups of people acting like psychopaths. Don't let profit driven corporations brand themselves as "family", or any other concept which deserves moral consideration.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  I don't see anything particularly wrong with either way, I guess. If they have to rescind offers to be a profitable business, so be it. Sometimes I will have to renege in exchange for working fewer years. I'm joining a business, not the Knights Templar.
- thghtihadanacct 4y ago
  ... And how do I put 'better than they are' into my 401k?
- giaour 4y ago
  If a relationship is bound by ethical principles on one side and a cold economic calculus on the other, it seems pretty clear which will be taken advantage of most often.
- xmonkee 4y ago
  Listen, man. I am a hiring manager. People have reneged on accepted offers. It doesn't affect me personally at all. It's a bit annoying, but the real damage to real human beings is close to zero. OTOH, a company rescinding an offer to someone who accepted and probably quit their other job can be devastating. It happened to fried of mine very recently and their life is very stressful right now. You are definitely arguing on the wrong side of this.

toomuchtodo 4y ago

It’s just business. If walking away from a fresh offer and starting role is burning a bridge, let the burning bridge light your way. The business will not return the loyalty, and one is woefully naive if they believe the business will. Look no further than VCs telling founders to cut deep now. How’s that for reputation? You get the labor market you cultivate.

throwaway5752 4y ago
The world is not infinitely large, and this field definitely isn't. Bad reputations are hard to repair.
- tempsy 4y ago
  This is like the definition of being scared into obedience.
  - throwaway5752 4y ago
    It is not obedience, not even close. It is highly empowering to act with the high ethical standards no matter what, because it's always in your control. That doesn't mean being acquiescent or being naive. I don't tolerated being mistreated or lied to, but I don't reply in kind: I just leave, I don't come back, and I don't forget.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      Funnily enough, this whole discussion thread is about whether it is unethical or not to "just leave" and "don't come back."
- 0des 4y ago
  > Bad reputations are hard to repair. I hear this a lot but the job market indicates the opposite. Given sufficient skill and availability everyone is hireable. In your world Jacob Applebaum is giving back rubs to Damore under a bridge somewhere pulling on two ends of a food stamp.

version_five 4y ago

My read of the root comment is "don't get tricked into thinking the company / manager cares about you and that you owe them something". No point in being naive and personally committing to a relationship that the other side is not committed to in the same way. It's not a question of ethics, it's a question of properly assessing the commitment that's being made

snarfy 4y ago
It's a good lesson. We spend most of our lives forming real bonds with humans. Corporations are not humans and interactions with them should not be treated as such.
AussieWog93 4y ago
>It's not a question of ethics, it's a question of properly assessing the commitment that's being made I've been on both ends of this, as an employee a few years ago and now an employer. I'm not sure if assuming the worst in all employers and putting in the bare minimum/acting unethically to avoid being "taken advantage of" is the optimal way to act. It pushes away the good companies that will reward loyalty and drive, and attracts unethical companies who have an adversarial relationship with their employees. Same goes for relationships - if you assume that the person you're going to marry is simply going to take your house and kids and build your relationship about minimising feeling stupid if/when it happens, you're not going to have a good time.
- NeverFade 4y ago
  > It pushes away the good companies that will reward loyalty Which are these companies that "reward loyalty"? I can't name a single one in the US market. Every single company cares about one thing only: its bottom line. They will retain any employee as long as it's good for their bottom line. Once it's not: adios. I've never heard of a company retaining an employee due to their "loyalty". Maybe it was a thing in the previous century?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

lr4444lr 4y ago

Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. In general I agree with this, but the situation described usually happens when offers have expiry windows. I'm sorry, but a job offer is a major life step for me, and when a hiring manager frames it like a TV infomercial with a countdown timer, he's dealing on a lower moral plane. After all the time we both invested in this process, I don't deserve a slick sales maneuver. It's like how I would not stab anyone either, but when you raise a block of wood overhead and menace at me, it's self defense. I have my long term career arc to preserve, including opportunity costs: unsolicited hostile negotiating tactics thrown at me will meet a defense.

luckydata 4y ago

eh screw that. having ethics doesn't mean being stupid. I reserve my manners for people and organizations that deserve them.

jmull 4y ago

I have a general rule not to lie or deceive people. But when I play poker, I lie and deceive as well as I possibly can, without remorse or hesitation. That’s because lies and deception are part of the game. Likewise, when I engage in an employment relationship with a business, I play by those rules. It is complicated, and to a degree it certainly makes sense to act as though you have a commitment beyond what money paid has bought… but just like all companies do, when enough is at stake, you should recognize that it’s a business relationship and it may not be to your advantage to pretend a higher level of commitment exists between you than really does. It’s a tough call. Burning bridges you don’t have to is not good. Neither is playing the sucker for very long. Edit: Yikes, I should have presented my poker analogy differently to be more clear! Lying and deceit is good in poker, but definitely not in business, IMO. In business the rule is something like this: Pretend that every sentence making claims about the future ends with "... assuming, of course, we either have a signed contract to that effect or nothing significant changes between now and then." That goes for your own statements and the other party's. I think you will do well acting truthfully with those caveats assumed (and avoiding those that don't act truthfully within those caveats). A reply put it like this, which I like: present your "future-perfect-best self" and expect your employer/potential employer to do the same.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
bradlys 4y ago
This is a great way to put it. Lying is 100% part of the game with employment. It continues even when you're still at the workplace. Are really people so asinine to believe that hiring managers aren't lying through their teeth the entire time they talk to you? I guess HN is full of people who are naive or have malicious intent. If anyone here thinks their manager truly cares about them (and you work in SV) - you're naive.
- gumby 4y ago
  What is the incentive for a hiring manager to lie? What could they get from it?

adamsmith143 4y ago

Is this a joke? Companies have no qualms about rescinding offers for people who may have already quit their current job or who need a job for Visa purposes. >Coinbase has some specific issues that aren't indicative of a broader industry probem I have seen examples of this from several FAANG companies.

tcfunk 4y ago

This isn’t poor ethics it’s self care. No one cares if you back out of an offer. Companies are interviewing multiple candidates for a single spot, it’s insane not to expect reciprocal behavior

SheinhardtWigCo 4y ago

> You aren't accepting to an industry, you are accepting to a hiring manager. No, you are accepting to work for a business that is legally bound to prioritize the interests of the shareholders over those of any employee. They will always, always be "rude" to you if that's best for the people whose money they're spending to employ you.

zrail 4y ago
> legally bound to prioritize the interests of the shareholders over those of any employee I 100% agree with you on your broader point. That said, this is incorrect. There are no laws that stipulate a business must put shareholders above anything else. There _are_ laws that say employees get first dibs on accrued pay in the event of a bankruptcy, among other things that businesses must do on behalf of employees. Ref: https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co...

colordrops 4y ago

If your personal ethics are to give respect to those who respect you, it is not out of line with personal ethics to treat corporations and HR departments like the lying sociopaths that they are. And why would you hobble yourself into a disadvantage and even potentially take a multiyear hit to your life because you have some vague notion of objective ethics? That's just letting them take advantage of you. They bet on engineers thinking the game is not rigged.

tshaddox 4y ago

Of course the obvious followup question is: how long do you have to stay at the job before it becomes ethical to leave (for normal reasons like finding another more desirable job)? In jurisdictions with at-will employment (like California), most full-time jobs explicitly have no guarantees or commitments from either side about how long an employment offer will last. If your ethics are instead based on supposed implicit norms (like "it's rude to change your mind on a job offer" or "it's rude to leave your job before the recruiter/hiring manager gets their bonus" or whatever), then I think it's entirely reasonable to examine 1) whether those supposed norms actually even exist, 2) what the source of those norms are, and 3) whether those norms systematically favor one party over another.

pcwalton 4y ago

> You miss some opportunities this way but you feel better when you look in the mirror. Regardless, as others have noted, Coinbase has some specific issues that aren't indicative of a broader industry probem. They seem to be handling this as well as can be expected given those problems. I have a hard time reading this as anything other than "it's OK for companies to rescind agreements but not OK for employees to". Consistency requires that it's either acceptable for both employer and employee to do that, or unacceptable for both. (Personally, I lean toward the latter.)

scarface74 4y ago

A for profit business is not “someone”. It is a legal entity for which you are doing a financial transaction - trading labor for money.

jzb 4y ago

You’re not, though. You’re accepting to the company. The hiring manager may well quit or you may be reorg’ed at a moment’s notice to a new manager. I’ve been a hiring manager and I would be bummed if someone accepted and then took another offer, but this is their livelihood and their life we’re talking about. You do not owe nor are you owed fealty to the hiring manager or a company that may very well kick you to the curb at any time.

PheonixPharts 4y ago

Everyone on HN should own a copy of Max Stirner's "The Ego and It's Own". Ethics is a scam by the powerful to control everyone else. I don't love my kid because of ethics, I love my kid because I love my kid. I'm not kind to my annoying neighbor because "it's the right thing", I'm kind to my neighbor because, despite his being annoying, I appreciate his friendship. Ethics that you're advocating for exist so people running companies an take advantage of you, full stop. If it's more important for you to feel smugly superior, good for you, but I don't buy into it. I'd rather minimize how exploited I am. You don't have to buy into someone else's definition of "ethics" in order to life a full, happy life, which involves loving your community and being kind to your neighbor. The rejection of mainstream ethics doesn't mean you have to be a monster, it just mean you're going to stop being manipulated for the benefit of someone far more powerful then you who never even paused for a moment to consider ethics. edit: obviously I'm being a bit hyperbolic here. Spinoza and de Beauvoir both establish fairly exquisite ethical systems. But by en large "pop" ethics is a scam that is asymmetrically followed to the advantage of people in power. Quick example: Music companies want you to consider ethics when pirating music, but absolutely never bring up ethics when it comes to decisions around artists that could potentially increase profits.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Aaronstotle 4y ago
Ethics encompasses a broad set of values, claiming the whole school of thought is a scam because you don't agree with a particular framework is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
throwaway5752 4y ago
I'm not talking about pop ethics, I'm talking about good old "golden rule" boring stuff. There is a tragedy of commons aspect to acting in this way, and I knowingly treat others like I would treat myself even doubting I'll get the benefit of reciprocity. You could say that I derive utility from it, and it's selfish? I could also shrug and say that I can't disprove that and what is the difference, at that point. I simply put myself in the shoes of the other person and ask, how would my decision make them feel? I may be even more selfish, in some interpretations, because I think that behaving this way impacts others, and pretty soon you have a culture of respect and empathy, which I think is good for everyone including myself. So I am acting towards my own benefit. I haven't read Stirner or Spinoza much, but it seems like common sense to behave ethically in the way that I've described. And maybe you have a point with Stirner regarding your later music piracy point, because I don't pirate music, and I don't do it for any reason other than I feel my integrity is worth more than any song. I don't care at all for the major labels' thoughts, I do it for "selfish" reasons and maybe it's egoism. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

outworlder 4y ago

> Don't have your personal ethics be subject to someone else's ethics, because if you do that, then it means you don't really have ethics. Corporations are not people. They don't have ethics. The most they can have is an ethical culture or guidelines - which still doesn't preclude them from doing anything. The power imbalance is just too great. Don't be an as**, but don't be naive, either.

zrail 4y ago

There are no ethics in capitalism.