zlacker

companies are profit first, not trust first

>>brainz+(OP)
Yes, we need more regulation. Or a better system to begin with.

>>ameliu+22
Do you think its a coincidence this came right after the ban on incandescent bulbs? Regulation got us here. It won't help when government is captured.

>>brainz+(OP)
Right: It's not the companies' fault they're engaging in deceptive and unfair business practices; they're profit-maximizing machines. They don't care about trust or know what it is.

It's our fault we're letting them do that. Bad behavior should be affecting profits. Probably through regulation.

>>solark+rf
It is absolutely their fault and not that of the public at large.

Companies are not sentient “profit-maximizing machines, they’re a collection of people. And it’s people making the decisions.

>>solark+rf
> Right: It's not the companies' fault they're engaging in deceptive and unfair business practices; they're profit-maximizing machines. They don't care about trust or know what it is.

this is an extremely dumb take, of course the people working at companies are responsible for bad dumb decisions that make their products worse.

>>friend+yc
> Do you think its a coincidence this came right after the ban on incandescent bulbs?

Not really. I do not use incandescent bulbs nor bulbs that require account. You've chosen 216 and you'll find it everywhere in nature.

>>_aavaa+Mg
But that's not how it effectively works at scale. It only takes a single person not bound by morals to mess it up for everyone. Those people naturally float to the top and are loved by shareholders (hence who's in charge at most places).

Individually the organisation is made up of people, but at large it's a big anonymous machine because those people are rewarded super-duper one-dimensionally: Help profits and you're rewarded or hurt them and you're out.

It makes about as much sense to anthropomorphise corporations as it does to anthropomorphise lawnmowers. They can not feel empathy.

>>banana+ku
The people who actually act responsibly tend to be ousted and replaced by those who instead primarily look after profits. See my other comment.

>>solark+Ha1
> But that's not how it effectively works at scale. It only takes a single person not bound by morals to mess it up for everyone.

The onus might be on us as the public to change the laws to outlaw bad behaviour, but this does not absolve the companies, and especially the people within them who conduct, condone, or reward deceptive and unfair business practices.

>>friend+yc
Yes. This is idiotic theory, Regulation is only about power efficiency

>>ilyt+Q72
You must be European.