6 ms·

There's no need to be apologist to a megacorp that does stupid things. They're going to continue even if you don't make excuses for them.

throwaway894345 4y ago
Lol the parent ruined the outrage party, but he’s likely correct. I’ve worked at companies that did the same thing and they weren’t “stupid megacorps”.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- josefx 4y ago
  > I’ve worked at companies that did the same thing The companies you worked for published their own browsers?
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    I'm not sure where exactly you're going with this. I can imagine several possible arguments that someone might make based on this observation, but all of them are pretty obviously poor so I won't impute them upon you.
    - mikestew 4y ago
      That was some damned fine word smithing to diplomatically state what savages like myself would have just mangled into less flattering prose. <golf clap>
ReactiveJelly 4y ago
There's a difference between apologetics and explaining
- fartcannon 4y ago
  To explain, you'd need to know the truth, which you don't. So you're just assuming they're innocent when history has proven time and time again that Microsoft is an active troll/bad actor.
  - dspillett 4y ago
    > To explain, you'd need to know the truth Unless you have some imagination, in which case you can explain a hypothetical or a possible truth. > So you're just assuming they're innocent The post you are responding to does not really suggest innocence overall, just perhaps they are guilty of something else (laziness or incompetence) in this instance and perhaps that they are covering that up.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    I don't have a dog in this fight (the only MS thing in my life is my xbox, everything else is Apple/Google/Amazon/OSS), but can we dispense with the low-effort flame bait posts?
  - kyriakos 4y ago
    Similarly you are assuming that they are is an evil intend behind these issues without information. We truly can't know why (unless someone in Microsoft runs an investigation) but we can think of potential reasons.
- josefx 4y ago
  The language used is positive. For example instead of "good business decision" one could say more neutrally "maximally lazy, standard breaking and anti competitive". In the context of mega corps it means the same but doesn't try to present it in a positive light.
  - ask_b123 4y ago
    That is not more neutral. Perhaps it is as neutral, but in the opposite side of the neutrality spectrum.
mikestew 4y ago
"Apologist to a megacorp", either argue your case against or hold the veiled insults. Parent made a reasonable argument to give an alternate explanation, perhaps you can, too.
fartcannon 4y ago
It's amazing, eh, how people will actively defend a company like Microsoft as if they're friends. They think it's fair to treat them with the same level of forgiveness and fairness you'd treat a colleague. Corporations behave like a hungry psychotic animal, simply because of the number of people in them and the incentive structure. The bigger, the crazier. Our colleagues and peers deserve the benefit of doubt. Microsoft deserves a leash.
- TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
  Indeed. I'm all in with Apple, but I ran Linux on the desktop for 19 years, and ran my own infra out of my house. I keep close tabs on Apple. It was a lot of work, but if they renege on their current "privacy" stance, I have an escape path.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  Many of us have colleagues and peers who work at Microsoft and many of us have experienced something similar where our company gets hated on based off misinformation / not having the complete story which we often can't provide because of NDAs.
  - fartcannon 4y ago
    They've admitted to gaming Hackernews in the past. Nothing is sacred to them. Their 45 plus year reputation as a shitty company is their own fault. Your friends don't need to work for Microsoft. They made their choice.
- beeboop 4y ago
  I hate capitalism as much as the next far left person but sometimes too much malice can be attributed to corporate actions when it's actually just stupid bureaucratic bullshit
  - krageon 4y ago
    We recognise that in people the internal state is fundamentally unknowable. That is why we judge them first on what they do and second on why they did it (if we can figure it out at all). Corporations are often judged the other way around when the actual internal processes that happened are just as unknowable. Know them through their actions, this is how you figure out whether or not they are bad.
smoldesu 4y ago
"Apologism for a megacorporation" should be the subtitle to HN, emblazoned in big neon lights under the Y-Combinator logo.
evilduck 4y ago
User A: "They intentionally sabotage Firefox" ... no evidence of this behavior User B: "What if it's just them being cheap or incompetent?"... no evidence of this behavior either Asshole take: "You MS Apologist! Quit making excuses for them" ... no evidence of this behavior either

throwaway894345 4y ago

Lol the parent ruined the outrage party, but he’s likely correct. I’ve worked at companies that did the same thing and they weren’t “stupid megacorps”.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
josefx 4y ago
> I’ve worked at companies that did the same thing The companies you worked for published their own browsers?
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  I'm not sure where exactly you're going with this. I can imagine several possible arguments that someone might make based on this observation, but all of them are pretty obviously poor so I won't impute them upon you.
  - mikestew 4y ago
    That was some damned fine word smithing to diplomatically state what savages like myself would have just mangled into less flattering prose. <golf clap>

ReactiveJelly 4y ago

There's a difference between apologetics and explaining

fartcannon 4y ago
To explain, you'd need to know the truth, which you don't. So you're just assuming they're innocent when history has proven time and time again that Microsoft is an active troll/bad actor.
- dspillett 4y ago
  > To explain, you'd need to know the truth Unless you have some imagination, in which case you can explain a hypothetical or a possible truth. > So you're just assuming they're innocent The post you are responding to does not really suggest innocence overall, just perhaps they are guilty of something else (laziness or incompetence) in this instance and perhaps that they are covering that up.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  I don't have a dog in this fight (the only MS thing in my life is my xbox, everything else is Apple/Google/Amazon/OSS), but can we dispense with the low-effort flame bait posts?
- kyriakos 4y ago
  Similarly you are assuming that they are is an evil intend behind these issues without information. We truly can't know why (unless someone in Microsoft runs an investigation) but we can think of potential reasons.
josefx 4y ago
The language used is positive. For example instead of "good business decision" one could say more neutrally "maximally lazy, standard breaking and anti competitive". In the context of mega corps it means the same but doesn't try to present it in a positive light.
- ask_b123 4y ago
  That is not more neutral. Perhaps it is as neutral, but in the opposite side of the neutrality spectrum.

mikestew 4y ago

"Apologist to a megacorp", either argue your case against or hold the veiled insults. Parent made a reasonable argument to give an alternate explanation, perhaps you can, too.

fartcannon 4y ago

It's amazing, eh, how people will actively defend a company like Microsoft as if they're friends. They think it's fair to treat them with the same level of forgiveness and fairness you'd treat a colleague. Corporations behave like a hungry psychotic animal, simply because of the number of people in them and the incentive structure. The bigger, the crazier. Our colleagues and peers deserve the benefit of doubt. Microsoft deserves a leash.

TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
Indeed. I'm all in with Apple, but I ran Linux on the desktop for 19 years, and ran my own infra out of my house. I keep close tabs on Apple. It was a lot of work, but if they renege on their current "privacy" stance, I have an escape path.
charcircuit 4y ago
Many of us have colleagues and peers who work at Microsoft and many of us have experienced something similar where our company gets hated on based off misinformation / not having the complete story which we often can't provide because of NDAs.
- fartcannon 4y ago
  They've admitted to gaming Hackernews in the past. Nothing is sacred to them. Their 45 plus year reputation as a shitty company is their own fault. Your friends don't need to work for Microsoft. They made their choice.
beeboop 4y ago
I hate capitalism as much as the next far left person but sometimes too much malice can be attributed to corporate actions when it's actually just stupid bureaucratic bullshit
- krageon 4y ago
  We recognise that in people the internal state is fundamentally unknowable. That is why we judge them first on what they do and second on why they did it (if we can figure it out at all). Corporations are often judged the other way around when the actual internal processes that happened are just as unknowable. Know them through their actions, this is how you figure out whether or not they are bad.

smoldesu 4y ago

"Apologism for a megacorporation" should be the subtitle to HN, emblazoned in big neon lights under the Y-Combinator logo.

evilduck 4y ago

User A: "They intentionally sabotage Firefox" ... no evidence of this behavior User B: "What if it's just them being cheap or incompetent?"... no evidence of this behavior either Asshole take: "You MS Apologist! Quit making excuses for them" ... no evidence of this behavior either