zlacker

They get paid lots of money.

>>tekla+(OP)
But surely those folks can walk away and put in their CV that they quit because they were in charge of implementing one of the worst ideas the history of internet has seen so far. Wouldn't you hire someone that puts that in their resume?

>>liendo+v
People don't work for the dignity, they work for the paycheck. As long as people are willing to pay others more for doing this than saving the internet, it will continue the trend. Lashings will continue until morale improves.

>>gabere+W1
> People don't work for the dignity, they work for the paycheck.

I'm sorry but I don't believe that. I do understand that line of thought if you are in a very complicated personal/financial situation but you're stating that the only driver is money, which is clearly wrong...

>>liendo+v
those will walk away, others will come and to them money would be absolute motivator. If there's a thing humans can invent/implement, without any regulation, it'll be implemented (and often even with regulation it may be implemented)

>>Moldot+p4
If only there was some form of labor organizing that could allow workers to keep their job while collectively opposing building horrific things like this.

>>wildrh+68
Why would the labor oppose building this? This makes their members tons of money.

>>liendo+v
>Wouldn't you hire someone that puts that in their resume?

To most employers, that would read as "prone to insubordination", and be an immediate red flag. Because each and every one of them will inevitably ask you to do something at some point that will be fucked up.

>>liendo+g3
it may not be your experience, but 95% of us work because we need the money.

>>gabere+4C
I do need an income too. I do pay rent, every single month. I do pay a loan, every single month. Bills? You guessed it: every single month. What's your point, really?

>>liendo+JE
People are going to take their pay and do their job because to do otherwise could mean they can't maintain their lifestyle or keep their family provided to the same standard they're currently living at.

Altruism is not a default position, and is unusual in the real world.

I'm not saying that's how it should be, or that people shouldn't work to make it otherwise. But you say why don't all those people walk away from that? How far would you go? What if you had children depending on you? It's very easy to condemn other people as "greedy" but you show a lack of understanding, of empathy, perhaps, for how people in general function in the world if you assume they should just do what you say because "obviously, my moral stance trumps their concerns."

Edit: I upvoted your other comment, by the way, where you lay out the very scenario I speak of. Many people are "screwed" because their lifestyle has expanded to their current circumstance. Few people realize that progress in some dimension rarely rules out regress back along the same path. Liberty requires maintenance, because there will always be societal forces aimed at eroding it.

>>gabere+4C
The good thing is that there are multiple sources of getting money.

>>liendo+v
They won't need to be hired again. Work a few years, retire without a care in the world.