2 ms·
This is an interesting discussion, no doubt. But no one questions this is the case. Yes corporations grow in power and reach and are taking on responsibilities
by TZubiri 2y ago
This is an interesting discussion, no doubt. But no one questions this is the case. Yes corporations grow in power and reach and are taking on responsibilities previously held by states.
I'm looking forward to the next step in the discussion. Should this not be the case? Where do these notions that imply that the state doing something is better than a company? I'm not a libertarian or an extremist, but I've had to reject some pretty simplistic views that businesses are evil. The word coporation comes from the word Corpus, in a sense the people congregate, each with their own function as an organ to serve as a body. So it seems as noble a concept as the state. I can point to corrupt states or corruption in golden standard states as easily as I can do the same for companies.
Is there a disparity between the goals and the results of these organizations (Companies for selfless reasons, the state for the common good)? If so, is it sufficient to judge the organizations based on their results, or should we demand organizations not only to benefit the common good, but to expressly pursue it?
Finally, not for profits enter the fray as a potential intermediate option. OpenAI's success is pretty unprecedented, although the reputation of the NFP is irreparably damaged. Even if courts decide that whatever fuckery they are doing is all good by the law, in the trial of public opinion we can all agree that OpenAI walks like a dog and barks like a dog.
- ekimekim 2y agoThere are two important differences between corporations (even non-for-profit ones) and the government. The first is that citizens have a say in who governs them. If the government does something they don't like, they can (at least in theory) vote for someone who will change it. The second is that in most legal systems, there are differences in what governments are allowed to do and what corporations are allowed to do. For example, a government may be required to provide services to all citizens, whereas a corporation has the right to not serve certain people (such as "people who don't own a smartphone"). These differences aren't insurmountable, but it's something to keep in mind.
- TZubiri 2y agoRegarding point 1, I would argue that citizens have more of a say in how the corporations operate, (and what corporations for that matter) as their say occurs every time they pay or not pay or engage into a commercial contract, which is much more often than once every 4 years.