81–90 of 189 posts
I wonder whom did Salesforce annoy enough to warrant a media smear campaign against them.
They have the deepest pockets, that's their only crime. That's why the lawyers are targeting them with an absurd lawsuit in hopes that it will make them settle instead of the bad publicity.
I wonder whom did Salesforce annoy enough to warrant a media smear campaign against them.
Benioff seems like a tool. He puts his name on children’s hospitals...it is possible to donate without people knowing, Keanu does it all the time. If you don’t hate Salesforce, you haven’t been paying attention. I’ve wanted forever to rid our company of anything to do with Salesforce, but I work with some people that can’t handle change. This law suit seems like a money grab. Go after the deepest pockets, but I perso…
Seems a bit paradoxical that he apparently donates all the time without people knowing, but you seem to know...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? No, but what is hinted at in the complaint is that Salesforce did some kind of custom integration for Backpage: > The women sued Salesforce Tuesday in San Francisco state court, claiming billionaire Marc Benioff’s company knowingly supported Backpage by providing customized database tools to market and remarket prostitutes to “pimps,…
If on the other hand they were actually building features designed to keep more pimps on the platform (not sure what that would look like for pimps specifically vs. other Salesforce use cases, but just hypothetically) Yeah, I have mixed feelings about this article. I've read a number of things that suggest that Backpage was better for women, allowing them to market themselves, protect their safety, etc. I'm for the d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? No, but what is hinted at in the complaint is that Salesforce did some kind of custom integration for Backpage: > The women sued Salesforce Tuesday in San Francisco state court, claiming billionaire Marc Benioff’s company knowingly supported Backpage by providing customized database tools to market and remarket prostitutes to “pimps,…
If on the other hand they were actually building features designed to keep more pimps on the platform (not sure what that would look like for pimps specifically vs. other Salesforce use cases, but just hypothetically) Yeah, I have mixed feelings about this article. I've read a number of things that suggest that Backpage was better for women, allowing them to market themselves, protect their safety, etc. I'm for the d…
How much of that was from the EFF or other tech industry allies about avoiding any weakening of Section 230?
The actual way to make things safer for sex workers is what you mentioned, decriminalization.
Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? Salesforce is a platform (albeit a horrible one I never want to work with again) and provides services to whoever pays. Illegal actions are between the local government and the user. Criminals lie. They could claim to be a humanitarian company while trafficking. The only way for Salesforce to know would be to manually investigate all th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Stupid laws are stupid. If person A is legally responsible for person B's actions, they will necessarily start asserting control over person B's life. Well, apparently the alternative is to subject person B to rather substantial ex-post punishment in order to deter them from committing crimes that they cannot pay meaningful restitution for. I think the option of shifting liability onto third parties that could mean…
Why should person A pay restitution for person B? Person A likely isn't granted powers of law enforcement and so has no means of preventing the crime. How can person A prevent a crime caused by person B? They cannot. Situations happen. People commit crimes for the first time every day (shocking even close family members). People like serial killers (and many other forms of covert criminals) may go undetected for deca…
Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? Salesforce is a platform (albeit a horrible one I never want to work with again) and provides services to whoever pays. Illegal actions are between the local government and the user. Criminals lie. They could claim to be a humanitarian company while trafficking. The only way for Salesforce to know would be to manually investigate all th…
>Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? If a company provides products/services to someone with the knowledge those products/services will be used for a crime...then yes. For example it’s legal for an arms dealer to sell a gun, but illegal to sell a gun if the seller knows the gun is being purchased with the intent of being used in a crime. Here what you have is Salesforce w…
Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? Salesforce is a platform (albeit a horrible one I never want to work with again) and provides services to whoever pays. Illegal actions are between the local government and the user. Criminals lie. They could claim to be a humanitarian company while trafficking. The only way for Salesforce to know would be to manually investigate all th…
>Should we also allow Microsoft to be sued for all the criminals that use windows? If a company provides products/services to someone with the knowledge those products/services will be used for a crime...then yes. For example it’s legal for an arms dealer to sell a gun, but illegal to sell a gun if the seller knows the gun is being purchased with the intent of being used in a crime. Here what you have is Salesforce w…
There were a number of other companies that played both sides of the fence in WW2, including Coca Cola.
I agree, if they knowingly do it, then they should be punished as such. Especially in the US, if we are going to allow corporations to be treated as people for tax and legal reasons, then clearly they should be punished as such. When a person knowingly assists a criminal, that person can be punished for any range of crime from being an accessory to directly involved.
It's a modern IBM punchcard case.
Backpage definitely enabled trafficking in some cases knowingly or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it made sex work safer in other cases.
[0] https://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID...
Since it wasn't mentioned in the bloomberg article, whoever has been paying attention knows that shutting down backpage has made sex workers less safe and more dependent on pimps. Prostitution should be completely legal and brought into the light, not pushed into the shadows.
The Nordic Model - decriminalization of selling, with criminalization of purchasing - protects sex workers from pimps and has been very successful in the countries that have instituted it.