5 ms·

Sure, but I think there's hope. People learn and change. I've been speaking pretty openly about how shitty the effects are of the pro-corporate, anti-human ide

Sure, but I think there's hope. People learn and change. I've been speaking pretty openly about how shitty the effects are of the pro-corporate, anti-human ideology that's prevalent on HN for a few years now. I've noticed more people joining me in speaking out, and less push-back. I made an aside comment a few days back about corporations being willing to murder for profit, and someone else linked a bunch of examples of corporate murders. A few years ago, I would have had to pull together all that research myself, and I was the only one I ever saw doing it. And to be clear, I'm not saying this to take credit for the change--I'm sure there are other people. I'm just saying, change is happening, if slowly.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
AlexandrB 3y ago
I've got some bad news for you about corporations: they're not sentient - some human made the decision to prioritize profit over human lives. Governments and other institutions do this as well (not just for profit, but perhaps for other reasons) because they're also run by humans. It's going to be pretty hard to find a human institution that's morally pure in the way you want.
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  "Other human institutions cause harm, therefore it's okay for corporations to cause harm"? Really? I'm not trying to find a human institution that's pure, nor do I believe any other human institutions are pure. I'm trying to get people to a) stop believing that corporations are morally pure, and b) stop doing nothing about the fact that corporations aren't morally pure. EDIT: Let's not go the direction where you assume I don't know that governments are imperfect too.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    A 'corporation' is just a group of people who've signed a pile of contracts, sometimes all physically located in one jurisdiction, but often in multiple simultaneously. So it doesn't seem likely anyone on HN ever genuinely thought they all groups of people are 'morally pure'. If they seemed like it they were probably just pulling your leg or trolling. It's even less likely that anyone actually does 'nothing' when they encounter groups of suspicious people in real life, unless they are an extreme doormat. Maybe try re-examining some of your assumptions about other HN users?
    - kerkeslager 3y ago
      > So it doesn't seem likely anyone on HN ever genuinely thought they all groups of people are 'morally pure'. Right, that was just a straw man argument the person I was responding to was making. > It's even less likely that anyone actually does 'nothing' when they encounter groups of suspicious people in real life, unless they are an extreme doormat. I have never been talking about abstract people doing nothing when they encounter abstract suspicious people. You're also making a straw man argument. I'm talking about a pervasive culture of Hacker News who not only does nothing, but actively opposes doing anything to prevent corporations (not abstract suspicious entities) from causing harm. A significant portion of HN unequivocally opposes any regulation of companies and will defend all sorts of horrible corporate behaviors. This isn't an assumption, it's an observation of reality. EDIT: It's literally an observation of a reality which is occurring in this chain of posts. You don't have to go far to observe it.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... This seems like a stretch to be honest, especially since most HN users use pseudonyms. Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? e.g. even someone very inclined to go against your comments and arguments would in fact still understand that a subset of 'corporations' are suspicious to some degree, but put on some pretence and so on.
        kerkeslager 3y ago
        > Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... Please refrain from telling me what I think. You don't know what I think. > Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? I've come across this pro-corporate, anti-human ideology in person as well.
        3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

AlexandrB 3y ago

I've got some bad news for you about corporations: they're not sentient - some human made the decision to prioritize profit over human lives. Governments and other institutions do this as well (not just for profit, but perhaps for other reasons) because they're also run by humans. It's going to be pretty hard to find a human institution that's morally pure in the way you want.

kerkeslager 3y ago
"Other human institutions cause harm, therefore it's okay for corporations to cause harm"? Really? I'm not trying to find a human institution that's pure, nor do I believe any other human institutions are pure. I'm trying to get people to a) stop believing that corporations are morally pure, and b) stop doing nothing about the fact that corporations aren't morally pure. EDIT: Let's not go the direction where you assume I don't know that governments are imperfect too.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  A 'corporation' is just a group of people who've signed a pile of contracts, sometimes all physically located in one jurisdiction, but often in multiple simultaneously. So it doesn't seem likely anyone on HN ever genuinely thought they all groups of people are 'morally pure'. If they seemed like it they were probably just pulling your leg or trolling. It's even less likely that anyone actually does 'nothing' when they encounter groups of suspicious people in real life, unless they are an extreme doormat. Maybe try re-examining some of your assumptions about other HN users?
  - kerkeslager 3y ago
    > So it doesn't seem likely anyone on HN ever genuinely thought they all groups of people are 'morally pure'. Right, that was just a straw man argument the person I was responding to was making. > It's even less likely that anyone actually does 'nothing' when they encounter groups of suspicious people in real life, unless they are an extreme doormat. I have never been talking about abstract people doing nothing when they encounter abstract suspicious people. You're also making a straw man argument. I'm talking about a pervasive culture of Hacker News who not only does nothing, but actively opposes doing anything to prevent corporations (not abstract suspicious entities) from causing harm. A significant portion of HN unequivocally opposes any regulation of companies and will defend all sorts of horrible corporate behaviors. This isn't an assumption, it's an observation of reality. EDIT: It's literally an observation of a reality which is occurring in this chain of posts. You don't have to go far to observe it.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... This seems like a stretch to be honest, especially since most HN users use pseudonyms. Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? e.g. even someone very inclined to go against your comments and arguments would in fact still understand that a subset of 'corporations' are suspicious to some degree, but put on some pretence and so on.
      - kerkeslager 3y ago
        > Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... Please refrain from telling me what I think. You don't know what I think. > Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? I've come across this pro-corporate, anti-human ideology in person as well.
        3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]