3 ms·

When I see that it always seems to me that the real issue is the CEO has made a conscious choice to pick profit over doing the right thing, and wants employees

When I see that it always seems to me that the real issue is the CEO has made a conscious choice to pick profit over doing the right thing, and wants employees who dislike this choice to leave. Which is essentially bad for society and why I think most firms in our economy should be co-operatively managed.

aeturnum 4y ago
I think you're giving them a bit too much credit. I suspect that is what they think they are doing - but IMO they're just being ineffectual. The real villains manage this like any other aspect of company culture. Exxon doesn't ban talking about politics and it hasn't crippled their operations!
- skwirl 4y ago
  >Exxon doesn't ban talking about politics and it hasn't crippled their operations! Probably because it's not happening there to nearly the extent it happens at big tech companies, partly due to the culture of older companies and partly due to the company attracting a certain type of morally agnostic person. Exxon did not release a statement following Friday's supreme court decision like most tech companies did and did not respond to comment when asked about it.
Veelox 4y ago
> When I see that it always seems to me that the real issue is the CEO has made a conscious choice to pick profit over doing the right thing Just going to toss my hat in the ring and say that I think selling data to ICE falls on the right half of the right/wrong spectrum. Not everyone agrees with your specific take on right and wrong. Sometimes those discussions shouldn't happen in the workplace.
- camdat 4y ago
  Can you expand on why you think this is a good thing?
  - kasey_junk 4y ago
    Not the OP and don’t agree at all but “a strong border is central to a strong state, which is central to a functioning state” is a logical argument. Belief that statehood is evil or that free immigration is a natural right are fairly out of the mainstream. Given that tools that support enforcing the opposite is mainstream.
    - archagon 4y ago
      It would be the height of irony for a crypto company to adopt this stance.
      - zdragnar 4y ago
        Crypto deals with digital transactions. There's essentially no geographically relevant scarcity. Migration impacts all kinds of things which are intertwined with physical scarcities and order- community service funding, housing needs and so forth. Having an orderly process for migration isn't at all related to cryptocurrency; many aren't actually private at all, and for the most part merely allow control over the supply to not be controlled by a central agency like the federal reserve. Being opposed to unlawful migration would be the equivalent of opposing people generating coins off the chain then forcing them in, creating more than were actually generated by mining. (I may have butchered the analogy, hopefully it at least makes some sense as to why they may not see it as an ironic or hypocritical stance).
    - weq 4y ago
      This a stupid statement thats NEVER been TRUE. No one state has ever existed in utopia its own vacume without immigrants. its a complete falasy without any basis in reality, much like religion, its pushed by the conservatives as a way to maintain repression. ICE is just a continuation of slavery. If Central/South Americans didnt continue to be leveraged by EVERYONE in the economy then there would be no american dream for them quest over the boarder for.
      - brippalcharrid 4y ago
- sigmar 4y ago
  You think people shouldn't discuss this topic (whether to sell data to ICE) at work, but that they should end up on your side of the decision magically? Am I understanding this comment right?
ehnto 4y ago
That is arguably the CEO's responsibility, and I'm not saying that as a defense, that is a defect of the companies we build. If we don't want CEOs that choose profit over community, then you have to build a society that rewards that, and companies that make it possible.

aeturnum 4y ago

I think you're giving them a bit too much credit. I suspect that is what they think they are doing - but IMO they're just being ineffectual. The real villains manage this like any other aspect of company culture. Exxon doesn't ban talking about politics and it hasn't crippled their operations!

skwirl 4y ago
>Exxon doesn't ban talking about politics and it hasn't crippled their operations! Probably because it's not happening there to nearly the extent it happens at big tech companies, partly due to the culture of older companies and partly due to the company attracting a certain type of morally agnostic person. Exxon did not release a statement following Friday's supreme court decision like most tech companies did and did not respond to comment when asked about it.

Veelox 4y ago

> When I see that it always seems to me that the real issue is the CEO has made a conscious choice to pick profit over doing the right thing Just going to toss my hat in the ring and say that I think selling data to ICE falls on the right half of the right/wrong spectrum. Not everyone agrees with your specific take on right and wrong. Sometimes those discussions shouldn't happen in the workplace.

camdat 4y ago
Can you expand on why you think this is a good thing?
- kasey_junk 4y ago
  Not the OP and don’t agree at all but “a strong border is central to a strong state, which is central to a functioning state” is a logical argument. Belief that statehood is evil or that free immigration is a natural right are fairly out of the mainstream. Given that tools that support enforcing the opposite is mainstream.
  - archagon 4y ago
    It would be the height of irony for a crypto company to adopt this stance.
    - zdragnar 4y ago
      Crypto deals with digital transactions. There's essentially no geographically relevant scarcity. Migration impacts all kinds of things which are intertwined with physical scarcities and order- community service funding, housing needs and so forth. Having an orderly process for migration isn't at all related to cryptocurrency; many aren't actually private at all, and for the most part merely allow control over the supply to not be controlled by a central agency like the federal reserve. Being opposed to unlawful migration would be the equivalent of opposing people generating coins off the chain then forcing them in, creating more than were actually generated by mining. (I may have butchered the analogy, hopefully it at least makes some sense as to why they may not see it as an ironic or hypocritical stance).
  - weq 4y ago
    This a stupid statement thats NEVER been TRUE. No one state has ever existed in utopia its own vacume without immigrants. its a complete falasy without any basis in reality, much like religion, its pushed by the conservatives as a way to maintain repression. ICE is just a continuation of slavery. If Central/South Americans didnt continue to be leveraged by EVERYONE in the economy then there would be no american dream for them quest over the boarder for.
    - brippalcharrid 4y ago
sigmar 4y ago
You think people shouldn't discuss this topic (whether to sell data to ICE) at work, but that they should end up on your side of the decision magically? Am I understanding this comment right?

ehnto 4y ago

That is arguably the CEO's responsibility, and I'm not saying that as a defense, that is a defect of the companies we build. If we don't want CEOs that choose profit over community, then you have to build a society that rewards that, and companies that make it possible.