Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

backchannel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 262 posts

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#221

Post by ShroudedNight »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #80
jobigoud wrote: post #40

I also always wonder how the people working on engineering land mines do.

I once had a conversation with someone who had worked on surface-to-surface missile guidance. He did it because he didn't make the connection between the circuits and the software in front of him and the deaths they caused. Then there was a war and he saw the missiles on the news with pictures of casualties, and suddenly it was "Holy fuck - this stuff actually kills people!" Some people think small picture, and he ju…

I got this information second hand, but for what it's worth: There was a graduate student at my university that was well known and highly regarded for his stellar software engineering skills. At one point he took a job writing a missile guidance system. His reasoning was that there were two options, either he wrote the system, and could make damn sure it worked exactly to spec, or someone else would write the system, and do about as good a job as the other complex software engineering projects he had encountered. In essence: he took the job to minimize collateral damage.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#222

Post by wdr1 »

aresant wrote: post #62

So what else is new. If you work at Facebook or Google you're benefiting directly from the similarly shady practices they used to grow on their way to being "pillars of tech" today. Do you remember when at LEAST 20% of Facebook's revenue came from Zynga? Like less than 5 years ago? Many speculated it was considerably higher, but Facebook never provided a full accounting (1). Or do you remember when Facebook literally…

Did you read the article?

It talked about how MS, Google, and others worked to prevent this type of behavior.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#223

Post by ryanlol »

rhizome wrote: post #215
kbenson wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First link in the quick Google search I did, which starts with a story where Henry Ford wanted to stop paying special dividends to partial owners. "At trial, Ford testified to his belief that the company made too much money and had an obligation to benefit the public and the firm’s workers and customers." The judge did no agree. I haven't read the whole article yet, but it seems definitely to apply (and also notes th…

I'd say a 100 year old case speaks to a lack of enforcement of fiduciary duty in the courts.

http://www.delawarelitigation.com/uploads/file/int51%281%29....

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#224

Post by ryanl0l »

notacoward wrote: post #213
ryanl0l wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what you said though. >Actions that are deemed to have been taken solely for their tax effects are clearly and explicitly deemed tax evasion by the IRS What you said would make almost all tax avoidance into tax evasion. Hell, even claiming deductions would by your logic be tax evasion.

You didn't read the citations before saying that, did you?

The citations do not support your original claim.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#225

Post by ryanl0l »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #212
ryanl0l wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidiaries in countries with low tax rates certainly aren't against the spirit of the law.

Isn't the spirit to promote foreign investment, as opposed to domestic companies restructuring themselves to look foreign on paper?

I'd imagine it's more about not driving all the domestic companies away.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#226

Post by cortesoft »

kbenson wrote: post #141
aresant wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly it's not an analog comparison, I never said it was. I wrote my comment because online advertising is a murky and often slimy place. Facebook & Google are the world's two largest online advertising companies - they sell and influence your attention for a living. Google now spends more money lobbying the government than any other corporation (1) including GE, Exxon, etc, etc. Depending on Apple's stock performa…

I'm pretty sure I understand your point, but you're going about it in a way that makes it hard to have a useful conversation. You've essentially said "online advertising is bad, because I say so, and these companies are big and they do it, so you should be worried about them." Is all advertising bad? What makes advertising bad? To what degree do these companies participate in that behavior? Is all lobbying bad? Shoul…

All advertising is not bad, but the best part of advertising is the signaling aspect of it.

Targeted advertising breaks that part of advertising: http://zgp.org/targeted-advertising-considered-harmful/

Facebook's entire pitch to advertisers is its ability to target ads, so I do think they are bad for the market.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#227

Post by pjlegato »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #205
jpeg_hero wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but then unfortunately you'll be an employee of an entrepreneur that crosses that line.... ..and if you are morally above that, then you'll work as a rent-seeker in a government office that taxes that entrepreneur. only way to win, is to not play.

I had an employer once who was about to cross the line, by getting a project from the gambling business. A cool software/hardware project (service interfaces for casino machines) that seemed to match my skills. I flat-out declined participation. He actually was very relieved, he was himself uncomfortable with it. The other time I threatened my employer with leaving on the spot if I ever see the shady spam-marketing t…

> Let's get on with Basic Income

Won't that just cause all the amoral people in politics to begin promising to raise the basic income more than the next politician will, reducing all policymaking to a race to bribe the populace, so that they'll ignore all the other amoral things the politicians are doing?

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#228

Post by yongjik »

drumdance wrote: post #170
Phlarp wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some may consider avoiding taxes to be unethical, others might say not avoiding them would violate a fiduciary duty.

When people bring up "fiduciary duty" in either a taxes or outsourcing context (i.e. it's Apple's fiduciary duty to build its products in China), I always ask for a pointer to a successful lawsuit in which this particular fiduciary duty was enforced. Yes, in theory it's their fiduciary duty to minimize taxes, but I've never heard of a board being sued because they didn't squeeze every last dollar out of their tax bil…

(Semi off-topic)

Maybe not what you want, but in 2008, the CEO of KBS, South Korea's public broadcasting corporation, was fired by the government for having agreed to court settlement in dispute with National Tax Service over how much tax KBS should pay.

Yes, he was fired because he had followed the settlement suggested by the freaking court. (The real reason was that he was a liberal appointed by the previous president Roh, and the new government led by conservative Lee Myung-Bak wanted him gone.)

Years later the court ruled that the firing was unlawful (duh), but somehow he wasn't reinstated, and anyways, the damage was done.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#229

Post by TeMPOraL »

pjlegato wrote: post #227
TeMPOraL wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an employer once who was about to cross the line, by getting a project from the gambling business. A cool software/hardware project (service interfaces for casino machines) that seemed to match my skills. I flat-out declined participation. He actually was very relieved, he was himself uncomfortable with it. The other time I threatened my employer with leaving on the spot if I ever see the shady spam-marketing t…

> Let's get on with Basic Income Won't that just cause all the amoral people in politics to begin promising to raise the basic income more than the next politician will, reducing all policymaking to a race to bribe the populace, so that they'll ignore all the other amoral things the politicians are doing?

Like in Honor Harrington? Let's hope not.

Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do

#230

Post by tropo »

mcguire wrote: post #211
fiatmoney wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every nation is built on a hill of skulls. "Has done in the past" is not the same as "is currently doing".

No one who eats meat can have a stronger ethical position than the guy who kills the chickens. If you enjoy the results, you cannot avoid responsibility for how the results were achieved.

You have a very different perspective. I think it leads you to believe that other people are all in denial, and would obviously be upset (feel shame, horror, etc.) if forced to accept the reality of chickens being killed. In other words, "meat is murder" for you.

I assure you, this is not how we all feel. I look at an animal and I see food. Trips to the zoo make me hungry. The only ones I don't want on the menu are the biohazards, the toxic ones, and the bad-tasting ones. My only reservation about killing them is the same as with changing the oil on my car: it's messy, dirty work.

Post reply on HN