5 ms·

"deliberate effort" That would be regulation and institutional oversight by the government. Inconvenient to say out loud on the altar of big tech capitalism.

simianwords 1y ago
It is in the incentive for capitalists to make their products safer.
- FranzFerdiNaN 1y ago
  Yeah no. Capitalism doesn’t give a shit about safety if it costs money unless forced by rules and regulations. It’s a profoundly anti-consumer system. It cares for one thing: profit in the short term.
- watwut 1y ago
  That incentive exists only when there are regulations around third party testing and lying in ads. Otherwise it is cheaper to flood the zone with lies, both about own product safety and dangers of other products. End result is unregulated market of unsafe products with toxic myths around them
  - simianwords 1y ago
    Why would companies just not increase safety instead of short term risky things like lying? Lying can only help you for the next one year but sustainably increasing safety can help you keep profits for decades.
    - watwut 1y ago
      Because lying is not risky for companies. Not unless there is also a regulation and enforcement punishing them if they overdo it. Lying can help you for years and years. Actual safety is visible only in long term and again, abset neutral parties and data able to verify it does not matter. You get further by lying about safety. And those neutral parties can exist only if there is regulation.
      - simianwords 1y ago
        That’s crazy! Who said lying is not risky for companies? You need to build brand trust when there is a lot of competition especially in the case of self driving where safety is of maximum concern. People are already skeptical and would look out for signals on such things. You can’t keep things hidden for too long - word would spread that some cars are actually unsafe. In general it is simply more simple and sustainable to not lie. Some times things fall through the cracks and you get problems like you see on Tesla.
        watwut 1y ago
        Self driving is actually nice example of situation where lies about safety worked nicely for years. And where they are breaking up, it is not because of lies, but because of politics. > Who said lying is not risky for companies? Practical results. Lying works, unless there is regulation, lawsuit or something like that.
    - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
      Lying isn't that risky as companies can just dissolve themselves and then a different brand can pop up having bought/transferred the whole shebang from the previous one. It's a different matter if a lot of effort has been put into making a well known long lasting brand - then there certainly is the risk of damaging the brand. However, damage to brands only really happens when consumers have access to accurate information which the company will obviously try to conceal.
- tempodox 1y ago
  What planet are you from?
- ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
  Only if their potential customers have full and accurate information about those products and their competitors. Unfortunately, that's very rarely the case and it ends up being a race to the bottom (The Market for Lemons - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons)

simianwords 1y ago

It is in the incentive for capitalists to make their products safer.

FranzFerdiNaN 1y ago
Yeah no. Capitalism doesn’t give a shit about safety if it costs money unless forced by rules and regulations. It’s a profoundly anti-consumer system. It cares for one thing: profit in the short term.
watwut 1y ago
That incentive exists only when there are regulations around third party testing and lying in ads. Otherwise it is cheaper to flood the zone with lies, both about own product safety and dangers of other products. End result is unregulated market of unsafe products with toxic myths around them
- simianwords 1y ago
  Why would companies just not increase safety instead of short term risky things like lying? Lying can only help you for the next one year but sustainably increasing safety can help you keep profits for decades.
  - watwut 1y ago
    Because lying is not risky for companies. Not unless there is also a regulation and enforcement punishing them if they overdo it. Lying can help you for years and years. Actual safety is visible only in long term and again, abset neutral parties and data able to verify it does not matter. You get further by lying about safety. And those neutral parties can exist only if there is regulation.
    - simianwords 1y ago
      That’s crazy! Who said lying is not risky for companies? You need to build brand trust when there is a lot of competition especially in the case of self driving where safety is of maximum concern. People are already skeptical and would look out for signals on such things. You can’t keep things hidden for too long - word would spread that some cars are actually unsafe. In general it is simply more simple and sustainable to not lie. Some times things fall through the cracks and you get problems like you see on Tesla.
      - watwut 1y ago
        Self driving is actually nice example of situation where lies about safety worked nicely for years. And where they are breaking up, it is not because of lies, but because of politics. > Who said lying is not risky for companies? Practical results. Lying works, unless there is regulation, lawsuit or something like that.
  - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
    Lying isn't that risky as companies can just dissolve themselves and then a different brand can pop up having bought/transferred the whole shebang from the previous one. It's a different matter if a lot of effort has been put into making a well known long lasting brand - then there certainly is the risk of damaging the brand. However, damage to brands only really happens when consumers have access to accurate information which the company will obviously try to conceal.
tempodox 1y ago
What planet are you from?
ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
Only if their potential customers have full and accurate information about those products and their competitors. Unfortunately, that's very rarely the case and it ends up being a race to the bottom (The Market for Lemons - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons)