Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I always give them the same answer: no. I don't work for parasites. Feel like specifying what makes them so distinctly more parasitic than, say, a company like Google or Facebook? Both of which many people here seem to have no trouble working for.
The number of people who have lost all of their money and then killed themselves using Google and Facebook is not zero. It's a fuckton lower than the number of people who have lost all of their money and then killed themselves due to betting. The morality line for me is at an unknown and unknowable (and you'll just have to deal with that I am a human not a computer) position that is higher than Google/Facebook and lo…
I'm a strong believer in people being responsible for their own actions in the face of voluntary options, and free to reject the entreaties of companies whose primary and paramount interest is their own financial benefit at your expense. Gambling companies are a near perfect example of such companies since they sell little more than transient, vapid "fun" at the risk of you completely wrecking your life, but one still can choose. (Yes I know there are also people with a tremendous psychological addiction to gambling, but it's tricky to form both rules or general moral guidelines based on a small subset)
In the case of Google and Facebook (and a few others), some sorts of genuine services are available and they can at least claim by these services to be of a different character from some betting company. However, the case of either business type, a core motivation remains extracting as much as possible from users through mendacious, manipulative means while addicting them into continually using their systems for as long and intensely as possible. In this, they're remarkably similar to your average betting company, except the currency they desire is instead of money directly, your information and attention, and as much of both as possible for as long as possible.