Mildly off-topic, but why do sites like this highlight the "top highlight"? I always find it really off-putting (in a "Oh, you tracking EVERYTHING I do" sort of way")
"Nice reading interest you have there. I'd hate to see anything happen to it."
The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
251–260 of 262 posts
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.delawarelitigation.com/uploads/file/int51%281%29....
That's just an example of fiduciary duty, not one relevant to taxes or outsourcing, which I mentioned in my original comment. Again, has anyone every sued a company to demand that they try harder to lower their tax bill or move operations overseas? Some companies even brag about NOT outsourcing. Socially conscious marketing.
>not one relevant to taxes or outsourcing, which I mentioned in my original comment.
Perhaps this is related to the fact that I wasn't responding to your comment?
>Some companies even brag about NOT outsourcing. Socially conscious marketing.
And?
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#253Today my mother got AD on her phone with "Android update", it was a pop-up from one of normal sites she visit. So she touched "update now" as she normally do with system messages about update... Then she confirmed, then she got 2 SMS, in one that deal was finalized. WTF? I've checked with Orange and indeed she was charged and subscription was started, 20 euro a month for some 3 shitty sms per week. They have turned t…
its trivial and free to block all the subscription sms 'services' aka scams in Poland, and probably the rest of EU.
Tak właśnie zrobiłem ;)
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's just an example of fiduciary duty, not one relevant to taxes or outsourcing, which I mentioned in my original comment. Again, has anyone every sued a company to demand that they try harder to lower their tax bill or move operations overseas? Some companies even brag about NOT outsourcing. Socially conscious marketing.
>not one relevant to taxes or outsourcing, which I mentioned in my original comment. Perhaps this is related to the fact that I wasn't responding to your comment? >Some companies even brag about NOT outsourcing. Socially conscious marketing. And?
I think their point is: does refraining from outsourcing expose a company's leadership to fiduciary duty risk?
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
>not one relevant to taxes or outsourcing, which I mentioned in my original comment. Perhaps this is related to the fact that I wasn't responding to your comment? >Some companies even brag about NOT outsourcing. Socially conscious marketing. And?
I think their point is: does refraining from outsourcing expose a company's leadership to fiduciary duty risk?
If such a decision is overwhelmingly likely a bad choice, most likely yes.
However, obviously there's always potential risks and costs involved in outsourcing that need to be taken into account when evaluating such decisions.
This would also presumably require that the leadership be informed of the obviously better course of action.
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, and that's the general idea I got too. My response was really meant to outline that there wasn't much concrete to discuss there, but I think there could be. For example, are we using bad as synonymous for illegal, or are we extending it to include non-illegal but generally frowned upon (at least the those that frequent here) behavior, such as issues to do with privacy or strong-arm tactics? Additionally, to cut…
Then make an argument for it. If you want to do your best, then don't try to lure the discussion in a different direction with semantics, random questions and flashcards, just state a clear point of view and it will become the starting point of the debate if others agree or disagree.
Not all discussions require you have a fully formed opinion about a topic. Arguments do (or at least should), but I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to discuss. Not everything has to be an argument or debate, but a discussion may contain one or more of those.
More succinctly, I'm not sure what the best way to handle the questions I posed is, but I do think those are questions worth asking. Should I have just stated that not all online advertising is bad? Maybe it is all bad, and someone can make a cogent case for that. If it's not all bad, I think it's important to consider how much bad behavior each company is responsible for, either in total or relative to other behavior. There are a lot of unknowns, but I think one extremely important point is that each of these unknowns weakens the absolutist and unsubstantiated statements the parent of that comment was putting forth. You don't have to show evidence to weaken an unsubstantiated statement, you can just show how it wasn't supported through data or critical thinking.
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess I'm not entirely shocked since Rakuten the parent company and Japanese ecommerce site has very questionable tactics like emails you can't opt out of and forcing new employees to sign up a large number of friends/relatives to the Rakuten credit card.
Huh? How exactly did the "force" you to get others to sign up for a CC? I also have no problem opting out of Rakuten emails.
New employees at HQ have quotas.
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook and Google at least have products that are mostly consumer-facing. One wonders what it would be like to work for Palantir.
It's interesting that you mention Palantir. Can you give some more detail as to what unethical business practices are conducted there, or are you simply referring to the HBGary business proposal scandal revealed in the Stratfor leaks in 2012? Disclosure: if you look through my comment history, I have a moderate pro-Palantir bias. So "shill" accusations are slightly appropriate.
> It's interesting that you mention Palantir.
I consider building software to purposefully enable dragnet surveillance one of the least moral things you can do.
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ask the end users instead.
Who's the end user? The company that pays 50onRed for ad placement is presumably satisfied and sees a corresponding spike in conversions. In theory, the viewer of the ad is grateful that they were made aware of a product or service that was relevant to their interests and/or needs, as evidenced by 50onRed obtaining a good conversion rate for its client. Pretty easy to rationalize it. The most problematic part would b…
It's really not that hard. Find a person who uses 500onRed (as a consumer). Ask them how satisfied they are with it.
They'll probably have no idea what you're talking about and once you explain that it's inserting the advertisements into Wikipedia and such they'll hate it.
In contrast, Facebook is completely honest about what they're doing: providing a free service in exchange for the ability to advertise to you. Hundreds of millions of people are happy with that trade.
Re: The Perks Are Great, Just Don’t Ask What We Do
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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?
At least they'd be bribing the populace rather than the wealthy.
The wealthy would still get bribed, and a lot more than the pittance that the populace would get.