5 ms·
I always wonder, when it's so clear some corporate decision will cause social harm, what the story the perpetrators tell themselves is to avoid feeling guilt or
by spicyusername 11mo ago
I always wonder, when it's so clear some corporate decision will cause social harm, what the story the perpetrators tell themselves is to avoid feeling guilt or responsibility.
Nobody believes themselves to be the bad guy, but many people frequently make decisions that cause harm.
- xdkyx 11mo ago"this will allow me to get more money"
- kouteiheika 11mo agoThere's no story. You need to remember - big corporations are not your friend. They're your enemy. They don't care about you. They don't care about doing good. They care about money. They care about control. They care about their stock price. That's it. You might ask - but what about the people who work at those corporations? And that's also pretty simply explained by this classic quote: it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
- rtp4me 11mo agoThey are not your enemy either. They are… businesses. Whose purpose is to survive and thrive. Just because you don’t like them or what they do doesn’t make them your enemy. And, lots of very talented and smart people work there every day for their own personal reasons. No need to bash or show hatred to them.
- Meneth 11mo ago"Just because you don’t like them or what they do doesn’t make them your enemy." Yes it does. That is the only thing that makes enemies.
- rtp4me 11mo agoWhat a sad, sad take. Do you even know what the word “enemy” means? Just because I don’t like my neighbor doesn’t make them my enemy. We are not going to war with each other, we just don’t like each other’s company. Just because I don’t like your comments on HN doesn’t mean I hate you. Good grief. Note: I do like my neighbor!
- afavour 11mo agoBut if your neighbour actively and deliberately makes your life worse then they certainly could be your enemy. If I’m queer and Facebook is actively censoring queer content then that’s more significant to me than just being a difference of opinion. The company is actively suppressing my way of life. Maybe the word “enemy” is too much but if so I think describing the idea as “sad” is equally as so. Giving a corporation a pass on behaviour you consider abhorrent simply because it’s a company and not a person seems pretty sad to me.
- rtp4me 11mo agoAnd by your own logic, how does censoring content actively suppress your way of life? Did someone from Meta go to your place of residence and actively threaten to harm you? Sure, maybe you don’t like the censorship, but how does that make them your enemy? Have you openly declared war on them? If you don’t like their content, simply move along.
- ToucanLoucan 11mo ago> And by your own logic, how does censoring content actively suppress your way of life? Because it erases our existence, which is what a substantial slice of straight society wants. Queer content and spaces are important for queer adults, because it gives us places to comfortably be ourselves without feeling subject to leering or judgement from bigots, and safety in numbers in case someone starts something. It gives us people to be among who we can talk to, form community with, and support one another. And for people just coming up, it's literally lifesaving. Numerous studies have shown that queer-leaning teens and kids are MUCH safer when they have access to safe places to explore who they are, even if they don't "turn out" that way, prevents awful, irreversible things. [1,2,3] Not to mention it can be lifesaving also when their parents are bigots themselves and they need a way out. > Sure, maybe you don’t like the censorship, but how does that make them your enemy? The bridge between "they suppress expressions of who I am" and "they participate in my extermination" has been proven to be quite short and easily traversed for queers many times, and for racial groups, and for religious groups too. [4] By your definition they may not be my enemy today, but they may be in a short period of time. > If you don’t like their content, simply move along. This is actually great advice for people who keep trying to take down queer content. Edit: And this is exactly what figures like Breitbart have been openly trying to do for over a decade. And it isn't just him either, you have the Family Research Council, Fox News hosts, Daily Wire personalities like Matt Walsh, and Libs of TikTok have all made careers out of normalizing queer erasure. For them, "winning the culture war" is not only their stated, in-text goal, it's a means of pushing us out of public life: sometimes just running us out of town, other times things too ugly to say aloud. 1. AFSP – LGBTQ youth face higher suicide risk, but affirming spaces cut that risk significantly. https://afsp.org/preventing-suicide-in-lgbtq-communities/ https://afsp.org/preventing-suicide-in-lgbtq-communities/ 2. Springer (2025) – Queer teens are 5–8× more likely to attempt suicide; supportive spaces reduce risk. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12310-025-09797-4 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12310-025-09797-4 3. Trevor Project (2020) – Having even one affirming space lowers suicide attempts by 35%. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/research-briefs/lgbtq-gender-affirming-spaces/ https://www.thetrevorproject.org/research-briefs/lgbtq-gende... 4. Oxford Research Encyclopedia (2019) – History shows censorship of queer spaces often escalates into violence and erasure. https://oxfordre.com/politics/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1221?rskey=IniHES&result=2 https://oxfordre.com/politics/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore...
- duskdozer 11mo agoPeople who cause harm in the course of performing their role in a business should be criticized and opposed, actually.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- panta 11mo agoIt is actively working to make the world a worse place and to degrade the fabric of society that makes them an enemy.
- rtp4me 11mo agoI dunno. I used Market Place yesterday to get a new dry erase board (new to me). And, many people use FB to communicate with friends and family. How is that working to make the world a worse place?
- sumeno 11mo agoThings can be good for you personally and still make the world a worse place.
- gunt_crusher 11mo ago[dead]
- immibis 11mo agoNo idea. There was once this German guy who planted flowers in front of factories. His name was Adolf Hitler and I'm not sure why everyone hates him so much. (This is sarcastic and do you see the problem with your comment now?)
- TheOtherHobbes 11mo agoLess of the "not liking" and more of an "are an existential threat to." This isn't high school. This is about real people having real experiences of fear, stress, violence, and horror facilitated by deliberate cultural engineering. If the very talented and smart people don't get that, that's a them problem.
- mulr00ney 11mo agoWhat would be a resaonable cause to bash them, in your view, if not disliking what they do? I don't think we should hate them or show them hatred. I don't think that if you're working at a company that's suppressing someone's way of life you're somehow above criticism or contempt.
- rtp4me 11mo agoThe question is, why do you feel the need to bash them? Do you feel the need to bash the coders of YouTube because they have ads or censor content? Do you feel the need to say ugly things to your grocery store because they don’t actively have the goods you want? Are they your enemy because they hire a certain type of person?
- mulr00ney 11mo ago> The question is I don't mean to be a dick, but no, the question was what is a reasonable cause to bash someone if it's not disliking what they do. I don't know if these weird Socratic replies are meant to be thoughtful but they read as dismissive and condescending. But hey, I can also play stupid games! > The question is, why do you feel the need to bash them? Why do you feel the need to defend them? (I answer this question less flippantly below.) > Do you feel the need to say ugly things to your grocery store because they don’t actively have the goods you want? Is not stocking garbanzo beans censorship? Why do you think this is equivalent? > Do you feel the need to bash the coders of YouTube because they have ads or censor content? Depends what Youtube is advertising. Depends what they're censoring. > Are they your enemy because they hire a certain type of person? Who'd they hire? ... There is a difference between my grocery store stocking or not stocking something and having problems with a multi-national trillion dollar company that has wedged itself itself into most people's daily lives and has a history of censoring content to curry favour with authoritarians. I sympathize with the folks who are working there trying to change things for the better, and I sympathize with the people who are legitimately stuck for whatever reason (don't know a lot about visas to the US, but those are probably a good reason). I also think they're tough enough to take it when they dunked on, and have the reading comprehension to realize that when people are critical of Facebook employees, there's context where it absolutely makes sense. Being a Facebook employee is not an identity, it's just a job. Facebook has pivoted to censoring queer content at a time when queer people are being marginalized after years of gains. Most of my ire is directed at the executives and management, but yeah, if you work at Facebook knowing what they do, you're not getting a pass.
- otikik 11mo ago> No need to bash or show hatred to them Not only bash but zsh, fish and sh them as well.
- prmoustache 11mo agoWhile privately owned business can put ethics before outright profit, large public companies are always bound to become assholes so yes they become de facto our enemies while also being our best friends because our pension depends on them.
- deaux 11mo ago> And, lots of very talented and smart people work there every day for their own personal reasons. No need to bash or show hatred to them. Lots of very talented and smart people work for big tobacco, Aramco, Stake (crypto gambling), Kick (streaming of crypto gambling), Purdue (made billions on manufacturing an opioid epidemic), DuPont, Shein, Nestlé, NSO group, the GEO group (private prison industry), Clearview (facial recognition at scale including for ICE) and indeed Meta.
- gunt_crusher 11mo ago[dead]
- gherkinnn 11mo agoSome businesses go out of their way to be awful and they deserve every ounce of scorn. Some even know they are causing harm, bury the evidence and continue. Also, simping for these companies is such a bad look.
- mikkupikku 11mo agoCorporations aren't your enemy in the same way bears aren't your enemy. They are... bears. Its not personal, and they operate outside of human morality so it doesn't even make sense to call them evil. But they'll still eat you.
- ancillary 11mo ago> And that's also pretty simply explained by this classic quote: it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. I've come to strongly dislike this quote, because it's so often used on HN to decide that whoever's disagreeing with you is doing it for simple, stupid and greedy reasons, thus absolving you of the duty to think a bit about whether there might be nuance you're missing.
- psychoslave 11mo agoWe all have limited cognitive budget. Keep nuance investment were there is relevancy for it makes more sense than spending it on things where it’s not going to bring any value to anyone.
- s1mplicissimus 11mo agoIt's called "aligning with company culture" or "not being difficult" among others
- alistairSH 11mo agoCorporations aren’t people, despite what US law sometimes claims. And Meta in particular - just look at the founder/leader. The “CEOs are all sociopaths” trope exists because of people like Zuck.
- jjcob 11mo agoCorporations aren't people, but in the end it's still people that are responsible for this crackdown on liberal content. It's someone at Facebook making these decisions, someone who is a person, we just don't know who the responsible person is.
- netsharc 11mo agoZuck has shown he's more interested in money/power than the well-being of other humans (the "dumb fucks"), he's cozied up to Xi Jinping and Donald Trump. Donald Trump's co-opted the religious nuts that are anti-abortion and anti-LGBT, and Zuck is more than happy to please him rather than risk prosecution and losing his money or freedom. What a model of cowardice.
- CyberMacGyver 11mo agoAfter reading ‘Careless People’ it was clear that they don’t have any moral compass. Remember how Mark was caught on hot mic saying ‘I wasn’t sure what number you wanted, Mr. President’ after lying about it on camera[0] [0]https://www.businesstoday.in/world/us/story/i-wasnt-sure-what-number-you-wanted-mr-president-mark-zuckerbergs-600-bn-slip-goes-viral-watch-492909-2025-09-07 https://www.businesstoday.in/world/us/story/i-wasnt-sure-wha...
- duskdozer 11mo agoYour assumption is that they need a story. They just don't feel the guilt or responsibility in the first place.
- energy123 11mo agoThe world has serial killers. Some people just neurologically can't feel guilt, and their entire life has been a training ground in how to appear as if they don't have this characteristic.
- deaux 11mo agoExactly, like the Meta CEO and likely most of his exec circle, as is well known.
- ProllyInfamous 11mo ago[flagged]
- mikkupikku 11mo agoI share your distaste of lawyers, but please consider this: How do you feel about prison doctors who provide medical services to child murderers? Does everybody deserve medical care, as your lawyer friend thinks everybody deserves legal representation? Should the prison doctor feel any guilt for helping such horrible people?
- ProllyInfamous 11mo agoYou've specifically mentioned the topic I intentionally avoided discussing, because of the sensitive nature, but: My genuine hope would be the other prisoners would be more successful in avoiding the need for any professional services rendered [read this as a survivor, which I am]. You cannot cure these abusers here on Earth — you have to send them somewhere else.
- 11mo ago
- afavour 11mo agoIt’s all about separation. One person makes a “decision making framework” but doesn’t make any individual decision themselves. Then another person makes the individual decision, but based on the decision making framework, so they feel no personal responsibility for the choice.
- baq 11mo agoThis is also, not incidentally, how police and military work, with dire consequences if decision makers are not aligned with non-enforcement non-military citizen ethics.
- perihelions 11mo agoPretty sure many of Meta's tech workers are furious about these actions, as they were in the previous story where 404media published a number of employee comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42651178 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42651178 ("[flagged] Total Chaos at Meta: Employees Protest Zuckerberg's Anti LGBTQ Changes (404media.co)") https://www.404media.co/its-total-chaos-internally-at-meta-right-now-employees-protest-zuckerbergs-anti-lgbtq-changes/ https://www.404media.co/its-total-chaos-internally-at-meta-r... ( https://archive.is/R1c7S https://archive.is/R1c7S )
- pavel_lishin 11mo agoAnd what did they end up doing about it?
- gonzo41 11mo agoNothing, the answer is nothing. The harm of Meta continues.
- seethedeaduu 11mo agoThe wages are too big. If they had ethics would they work there at all?
- ericmay 11mo agoIt’s even easier to delete your WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook accounts. Yet so many are happy to criticize and keep ingesting ads.
- watwut 11mo agoThey feel good about it and proud about themselves
- rsynnott 11mo agoI mean, you've got to imagine that Facebook tends to drive people who would be worried about such things away; if you had any sense of responsibility and could get another job, why would you stay? It's not like this is the first problem Facebook has had...
- greekrich92 11mo agoSociopathy is often comorbid with being an executive
- drcongo 11mo agoYou'd need to be a psychopath to work there in the first place, so I doubt any of them have any feelings about this at all.
- bell-cot 11mo agoDenial is not just a river in Egypt. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" - Upton Sinclair
- MadcapJake 11mo agoThe Corporate religion demands unwavering profit orientation. "Ethics" is just barely maintained right above the limits of market research. All for the betterment of man, amirite?
- ModernMech 11mo agoWelcome to the world of antisocial personality disorders. The rationale goes: That didn't happen. And if it did, it wasn't that bad. And if it was, that's not a big deal. And if it is, that's not my fault. And if it was, I didn't mean it. And if I did, you deserved it. It's called the "narcissist's prayer", it's what narcissists and sociopaths tell themselves to absolve themselves of accountability. Whatever the situation, they have an excuse as to how it's not their fault. It's like the stages of grief but for people trying to avoid consequences or guilt for their actions.
- coldtea 11mo agoAside from prizing their salary more than the guilt, if it was "so clear" it wouldn't be a controversial issue. For some in Meta they could very well think that the opposite caused social harm, either in absolute terms ("abortion is a sin/murder") or in relative terms ("has its uses, but we go too far and make it too easy"). Why the assumption those working in tech would be liberal? Thiel isn't.
- jfindper 11mo agoPositions higher up the corporate ladder are optimized for people who feel little/no guilt or empathy. I forget the exact statistic, but CEOs are disproportionately sociopaths (compared to the whole population). So, no story required because there's no guilt felt.
- makeitdouble 11mo agoTo complete sister comments: people who go work for Meta already have their priorities in place or won't have these kind of conundrums. A few elite people are poached, some are acquihired, but most applied to get the job. I believe if you can make it to Meta you can make it to equivalent mega companies, it's a choice.
- dfxm12 11mo agoThese people only think in terms of money. Their bank accounts will tell them if it was the right decision or not. Someone like Zuck actively isolates themselves: from buying huge tracts of land to literally isolate themselves, building underground shelters, hiring security to keep riff-raff away, etc. They have no concept of society. They just don't see themselves living in the same world as we do.
- GuB-42 11mo agoYou have the point of view that having publicly available queer content and abortion information is a good thing, something I generally agree with. But not everyone think that way, some think that by limiting access to abortion information, they are actually saving (unborn) lives. Some people think that "sex positive" movements are morally questionable and help spread infection. For them, they are the good guys and they think that Meta is finally doing the right thing. These are divisive political subjects and political parties with these ideas get elected for a reason. In a democracy, parties will not promote ideas that no one agree with, they need the votes, so if they are promoting them, it means that for a large part of the population, it is the right thing to do. HN is a bubble with mostly liberal ideas, we have to understand it for what it is. That's in addition to the idea that "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it". But it applies more to activities that are almost universally recognized as bad rather than partisan ideas, things like scamming.
- duskdozer 11mo ago>HN is a bubble with mostly liberal ideas I'm not sure I agree with this, though I suppose it depends on what one defines as "liberal." >In a democracy, parties will not promote ideas that no one agree with, they need the votes, so if they are promoting them, it means that for a large part of the population, it is the right thing to do. I would say instead that it means that for a large part of the voting population, the ideas are not objectionable enough for them to vote differently or abstain. People are already voting in spite of the disconnect between the policies they support and the policies that actually get implemented [0] [0] https://archive.org/details/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc https://archive.org/details/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_th...