3 ms·

Reads like a "too big to fail" argument. It works for the banking industry I guess so why not here too.

• haswell 3y ago
  It’s unrelated in structured and substance to “too big to fail”. Too big to fail implies catastrophic harm worse than the (unpalatable) steps necessary to prop something up. This argument is really exploring the line between “company did something harmful” and “company did something so harmful they should no longer exist”. I’m not arguing for either, but TBTF is unrelated.
  • kevinventullo 3y ago
    I’m not sure I agree that the current argument is about whether the company did something so harmful they should no longer exist, but I agree that whatever it is, it is not the same as TBTF.
    • haswell 3y ago
      This was in response to a comment up the chain exploring the premise: > Given that scenario, does the ethical math really work for ACME to be completely destroyed? I agree that the broader conversation is not just about ceasing to exist, but this was the context of my comment.