5 ms·
Can someone explain what this somewhat recent phenomenon is where people feel the need to defend the worlds biggest billion dollar businesses, that are also oft
by rjzzleep 11mo ago
Can someone explain what this somewhat recent phenomenon is where people feel the need to defend the worlds biggest billion dollar businesses, that are also often subsidized by tax payer money in weird ways?
How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw?
- hexbin010 11mo ago> How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw? They hired a ton of people on very very good salaries
- nsoqm 11mo agoThe original comment said to stop giving money to these companies if they are not giving you a satisfactory service. The opposite, to be lazy and to continue giving them money whilst being unhappy with what you get in return, would actually be more like defending the companies.
- ImPostingOnHN 11mo agoThe original comment actually criticized Microsoft for a lack of investment to secure their paid and fairly lucrative service that they bought a popular code hosting platform to integrate with. The opposite we see here: to not criticize them; to blame Microsoft's failure on the critics; and even to discourage any such criticism, are actually more like defending large companies.
- miohtama 11mo agoIt is a lucrative service just because people are lazy and keep buying from Microsoft. Otherwise, they would migrate to better alternatives. This especially includes governments and other institutional buyers.
- thrdbndndn 11mo agoI won't "defend" Microsoft in this case, but I am always annoyed by phrases like "world's biggest billion-dollar businesses... bablah". Their size or past misbehaviors shouldn't be relevant to this discussion. Bringing those up feels a bit like an ad hominem. Whether criticism is valid should depend entirely on how GitHub Actions actually works and how it compares to similar services.
- Sl1mb0 11mo agoMicrosoft's past behavior _may_ explain *why* there is a lack of investment in Github Actions; so yes, TheFeelz are relevant.
- thrdbndndn 11mo agoThen I agree with this. But still feel their size is irrelevant.
- Tostino 11mo agoTheir size is relevant in so far as it allows them to make really any investment they want to in GHA without it causing a cash flow problem.
- gcr 11mo agoAd hominem applies to people. Corporations aren’t people, and ICs aren’t corporations.
- wizzwizz4 11mo ago> Their size or past misbehaviors shouldn't be relevant to this discussion. If the past misbehaviours are exactly the same shape, there's not all that much point re-hashing the same discussion with the nouns renamed.
- tonyhart7 11mo agoI think big tech being so big now that these "issue" is too small for their priority is saying something You better thank god for MS for being lazy and incompetent, the last thing we want for big tech is being innovative and have a stronger monopoly
- drdec 11mo ago> How did we go in 20 years from holding these companies to account when they'd misbehave to acting as if they are poor damsels in distress whenever someone points out a flaw? Honestly I think the problem is more a rosy view of the past versus any actual change in behavior. There have always been defenders of such companies.