Every B2C startup I have ever worked at has basically put a non-trivial component of their "product" efforts into finding some clever way to screw over customers and feel good about it at the same time. I've had YC startup teams describe fairly horrific ways of monetizing user data with a gleeful smile on their face ("It is really in the user's best interest!")
I've listened to interviews with phone scammers before and basically their worldview is that they're ripping off some first-world asshole who would be just as happy to destroy the scammers own country if it could make the cost of consumer goods slightly lower.
I suspect working for a ransomware company would at least mean you don't have to pretend the awful things you are doing are for the greater good, and I suspect also contains a bit of the phone scammer view that the people you are attacking are ultimately your enemy as well.
It's far more surreal when I've had to check into work, plan all day how to rip-off or exploit users without losing them, and then be cheerful about what a great customer focused team we are.
> It's far more surreal when I've had to check into work, plan all day how to rip-off or exploit users without losing them, and then be cheerful about what a great customer focused team we are.
That hits home.
I remember an interview with a ransomware-as-a-service business owner. He was pretty upfront with having grown up in severe poverty and being empathically impaired. Somehow when a greedy person is honest about it it makes it better for me. I feel like I know what to expect of him. It's the self-labeled good people who think that means justify the ends that make my alarm bells ring.
>Somehow when a greedy person is honest about it it makes it better for me. I feel like I know what to expect of him. It's the self-labeled good people who think that means justify the ends that make my alarm bells ring.
Old phrase: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I also suspect that we don't need to look at history to see the backing proof. The SJW religion is very much what this quote is talking about and it's never been more relevant about the tyranny of the preachers of that religion as they mob anyone who disagrees.
The point is that "actual" tyrannical robbers are bad - and there's no denying that... but so are those who are worse in the name of "good".
> The SJW religion
> but so are those who are worse in the name of "good".
And how exactly is the "sjw religion" worse in the name of good? I get it. You don't like people calling you out if you do shitty things. But that doesn't make it worse than robber barons. Or even in the same ballpark.
"how is the sjw religion worse in the name of good" years of violent protests? Millions... billions?... of damage done? People killed?
Or do you agree that peoples lives should be destroyed if they do something you disagree with? Mobs of people calling the friends, family, work places, etc of someone who dares do something you disagree with?
I personally know someone who works in a rescue... someone got a bug in their butt that she did something "wrong". She's been hounded for weeks by The Righteous who have the Holy Word that she did "wrong" - no matter the nuances about what happened.
You can ignore the violence, the mobs, the hounding and the overall shitty attitudes of the SJW Religous... but they are literally the modern day Crusaders who have The Holy Decree to destroy the Heathens.
You want to know how SJWs are worse in the name of good? Open your eyes and look at all the "worse" done on a daily basis. I could list dozens or hundreds of publicly available examples but if you can't ALREADY see them without me pointing them out?
We can agree that C.S. Lewis' quote is not a scientific theory, but that doesn't make it incorrect.
For example, to the extent that the various Communist regimes fall under this descriptor, C.S. Lewis may have a point.
Are you dismissing this out of some logical-positivist impulse, because you reject the idea that well-intentioned groups can behave tyrannically, or because you don't think anybody acts with good intentions?
I read the comment as saying that actual robber barons are worse than busy bodies.
Take the oil and gas industry for example. They have known for 40+ years that they cause global climate change while disavowing it publicly and funding fake scientists and interest groups to spread FUD about it. I think the effects of global climate change will be at least an order of magnitude worse than well intentioned busy bodies. Climate change doesn't sleep.
(You could easily say the same about the tobacco industry, advertising monopolies, social networking websites, etc.)
I'm not sure I follow your opinion on the quote... I don't see the oil/gas companies as "tyrannical" entities. Nor would I personally apply this to companies from tobacco to Google...
"they have known about climate change" and those who know about it also have said we'll be dead in 1980... 1990... the seas will rise a dozen feet in 2000 and the snowcaps will be gone in 2010. If the "tyrannical" companies are wrong...
If you want to go that route that Oil Companies are Robber Barons... that would make the GCC doomsayers the "good" guys who are as bad on the other end - and have no problem being as bad with their lies and happy about it because it matches their conscience.
what does that say about the doomsayers? Exxon knew? When did the doomsayers know that their predictions were bunk? They are the "omnipotent moral busybodies" who have no care that all of their predictions are wrong and the damage - past, present and future - of their lies? Who cares because they are "Saving the Planet"...
> basically their worldview is that they're ripping off some first-world asshole who would be just as happy to destroy the scammers own country if it could make the cost of consumer goods slightly lower.
I happened to watch "The Battle of Algiers" last night and the scammers' sentiments reflect what the FLN commander Ben M'Hidi (insurgent/freedom-fighter depending on who you ask) had to say in response to questions about the civilian death toll:
Journalist: M. Ben M'Hidi, don't you think it's a bit cowardly to use women's baskets and handbags to carry explosive devices that kill so many innocent people?
Ben M'Hidi: And doesn't it seem to you even more cowardly to drop napalm bombs on defenseless villages, so that there are a thousand times more innocent victims? Of course, if we had your airplanes it would be a lot easier for us. Give us your bombers, and you can have our baskets.
I must mention here that I am not taking any ideological sides, and firmly believe that killing of innocent civilians, by any party whatsoever is plain wrong.
I suppose in any battle, ideological or otherwise, the actors involved come to justify their tactics as being in service of a greater, grander goal which also, at least in their minds, allows them to subvert responsibility and accountability.
Even Hitler and Stalin thought they were the good guys.
That doesn't mean one can't make moral judgments about which side is more or less evil, just that it's hard to be impartial., and in the end of the day, like in politics, it depends on what your values are.
>That doesn't mean one can't make moral judgments about which side is more or less evil, just that it's hard to be impartial
one would think it would be easy - just compare counts of innocents killed by each side. Unfortunately that would frequently make a "good"(winning) side look like a bad side and so they force other and more complicated criteria like this:
> one would think it would be easy - just compare counts of innocents killed by each side.
It would also be a very flawed measurement unless you count the innocents the "evildoers" wanted to kill. The difference between what Hitler achieved (and that's already horrible) and what he wanted to achieve is rather big.
> It's far more surreal when I've had to check into work, plan all day how to rip-off or exploit users without losing them, and then be cheerful about what a great customer focused team we are.
I suspect this hits home for a ton of people and applies to many people who don't (or are unwilling?) to realize.
I used to work for a company where their whole deal to make money was convince old people to enter their credit card and make them forget they ever entered it. Of course, I did not know this when I joined. I stayed for about 6 months I think.
TBH this seems like such a weirdly pessimistic take to me.
I mean, on one hand, I fully understand that many startups begin by offering a free or very low cost service and then have to figure out how to monetize, but I don't really see that as "screwing over the user", I see that as ensuring the business is a going concern. Even as a user, when I see that a business is transitioning from "everything is free and great" stage to "now we need to make money stage", I either leave or decide it's worth it, but I'm not really mad about that.
Furthermore, there are lots of startup services that I use, love and pay for, and I don't feel like I'm getting screwed over.
You’re talking about the thinks you know as a customer. Things like selling your data or the other things they do with it are often not disclosed. Did Facebook tell you that it wanted to learn how to make you or your children addicted to it in order to monetize your engagement?
It's not just startups, we live in a scam economy. There's a few companies that make good stuff, but they are rare.
Just an example, in 2017 I bought a fairly expensive, brand-new GM truck. It was manufactured in Mexico. I've bought GM stuff before but they were made in Texas. I'm sure it was a cost saving measure. I recently sold it after 4 years and 14k miles. Dead battery needed to be replaced, the transmission was hosed, and I took a bath on it. It's known as the "Chevy shake." There's a big class action suit that I believe was dismissed. We bailed them out in 2008 and they started making absolute dog shit. I'll never buy a GM truck again.
Most home appliances are also garbage and will only last you 5 years or so, if that. My elderly mother is paying for 2 ovens. The first one stopped working before it was even paid off. Her current one won't heat consistently and she constantly complains about it.
The LG OLED TV I bought a few years ago has YouTube burned into the screen. I won't reward them with another purchase. My "commercial grade" grill's wheel rusted off after a couple of years because it wasn't treated and had cheap metal. I have the broken, detached wheel on the ground under it, sideways so the thing won't constantly rock back and forth.
Planned obsolescence that almost killed many US industries 40 years ago is back in full force and will have predictable results.
I've listened to interviews with phone scammers before and basically their worldview is that they're ripping off some first-world asshole who would be just as happy to destroy the scammers own country if it could make the cost of consumer goods slightly lower.
I suspect working for a ransomware company would at least mean you don't have to pretend the awful things you are doing are for the greater good, and I suspect also contains a bit of the phone scammer view that the people you are attacking are ultimately your enemy as well.
It's far more surreal when I've had to check into work, plan all day how to rip-off or exploit users without losing them, and then be cheerful about what a great customer focused team we are.