3 ms·

People see the instances of megacorps blatantly flouting laws and assume this must be their default behavior, but really the default is typically conservatism a

People see the instances of megacorps blatantly flouting laws and assume this must be their default behavior, but really the default is typically conservatism and caution with regards to regulations (with an occasional flout where they feel they can get away with it or they can make a ton of money off of the flouting). This is an area where it's gonna be pretty subjective whether many comments are law breaking, so the internal guidelines for censors will likely err on the side of caution, which means removal.

southernplaces7 2y ago
>People see the instances of megacorps blatantly flouting laws and assume this must be their default behavior, but really the default is typically conservatism and caution with regards to regulations (with an occasional flout where they feel they can get away with it or they can make a ton of money off of the flouting). This is exactly the worst hypocrisy of these very same megacorps, and particularly notable in mega tech corps, which have a particular tendency towards preaching loudly while practicing very differently. On the one hand, they play themselves as arbiters of moral values and display a nearly (no scratch that, overtly, blatantly) preachy attitude towards their users and customers and even the wider public about social responsibility, fighting "incorrect" thinking or conduct, following proper regulations and etc and etc. With this attitude in mind, they essentially forcibly (at least within their reach as platforms) "guide" average people into certain types of behavior. They also make public speeches, blog posts, PR releases and all sorts of endless vomit about the de jure moral or social crusades of our time, depending on each company's specific context. Aaand then, they also simultaneously perform nearly every kind of legal, social and financial malfeasance you can imagine, often blatantly for the sake of their real bottom line, which is market dominance and more financial power. (looking at just a few examples: OpenAI's blatantly predatory behavior toward pretty much everyone else's content, or its obviously dishonest crap about the supposed dangers of AI in its efforts to scare regulators in its favor, or Meta's too-numerous-to-count scandals across many years, or Google's intense quest to utterly destroy search for the sake of further ad dollars, or Amazon's indifference to an absolute avalanche of consumer fraud on its product sales platform while at the same time squeezing sellers as often and much as possible) All of the above is to not even mention the completely presumptuous attitude among nearly all modern tech companies, and more recently, most other major consumer-oriented companies of all kinds (these days any large company is really a tech company at heart) that they have an absolute right to not only pry into everything you do no matter how private, but also store and distribute or sell that information as they please to nearly anyone at all with zero consequence. This last has been taken to the point where for all their talk of "valuing your privacy" the default behavior is the diametric opposite, and the default response to anyone who really tries to dial it back is overt hostility. It's all quite grotesque. How anyone could take seriously a single major major techcorp leader's preaching on any social issue is beyond me.

southernplaces7 2y ago

>People see the instances of megacorps blatantly flouting laws and assume this must be their default behavior, but really the default is typically conservatism and caution with regards to regulations (with an occasional flout where they feel they can get away with it or they can make a ton of money off of the flouting). This is exactly the worst hypocrisy of these very same megacorps, and particularly notable in mega tech corps, which have a particular tendency towards preaching loudly while practicing very differently. On the one hand, they play themselves as arbiters of moral values and display a nearly (no scratch that, overtly, blatantly) preachy attitude towards their users and customers and even the wider public about social responsibility, fighting "incorrect" thinking or conduct, following proper regulations and etc and etc. With this attitude in mind, they essentially forcibly (at least within their reach as platforms) "guide" average people into certain types of behavior. They also make public speeches, blog posts, PR releases and all sorts of endless vomit about the de jure moral or social crusades of our time, depending on each company's specific context. Aaand then, they also simultaneously perform nearly every kind of legal, social and financial malfeasance you can imagine, often blatantly for the sake of their real bottom line, which is market dominance and more financial power. (looking at just a few examples: OpenAI's blatantly predatory behavior toward pretty much everyone else's content, or its obviously dishonest crap about the supposed dangers of AI in its efforts to scare regulators in its favor, or Meta's too-numerous-to-count scandals across many years, or Google's intense quest to utterly destroy search for the sake of further ad dollars, or Amazon's indifference to an absolute avalanche of consumer fraud on its product sales platform while at the same time squeezing sellers as often and much as possible) All of the above is to not even mention the completely presumptuous attitude among nearly all modern tech companies, and more recently, most other major consumer-oriented companies of all kinds (these days any large company is really a tech company at heart) that they have an absolute right to not only pry into everything you do no matter how private, but also store and distribute or sell that information as they please to nearly anyone at all with zero consequence. This last has been taken to the point where for all their talk of "valuing your privacy" the default behavior is the diametric opposite, and the default response to anyone who really tries to dial it back is overt hostility. It's all quite grotesque. How anyone could take seriously a single major major techcorp leader's preaching on any social issue is beyond me.