The tech sector might be evil • Hacker News Board

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#181

Post by imglorp » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:24 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #133

Sean1708 wrote: post #132

> It notably involves the M-word This might be a horrendously stupid question, but what is the "M-word"? The only m-word introduced up until that point is "moment" but that's obviously not it. I was thinking maybe Microsoft, but they then go on to talk about Facebook, Amazon, and Google. Edit: OK that was a very stupid question, I should have read to the end of the article first.

> The M-Word -- It’s “Monopoly” of course. From the article, farther down.

This ties into the Buffet might be evil discussion last week [1]. The short version is, he prefers a company that "takes no capital, and yet grows", as well as having a moat to ward off competition (m-word). I think both are equally evil in this discussion. Basic R&D investment used to be the leader-makers of the US, but now it's scorned by shareholders.

[1] http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/StreetTalk/Warren-Buffett-Ber...

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#182

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:28 PM UTC

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #141

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they are just writing regular code for some subsystems' subsytem, why is that evil? Why should it be relevant whether you are "writing regular code for some subsystems' subsytem"? Shouldn't the relevant question be whether your contribution is "net evil" or "net good"? How would you suggest we defend against an institution dividing the work to build some hypothetical ultimate evil into thousands of "regular smal…

Not everyone draws the line at the same spot. Everyone's constraints in life are different. Also, talking from a position of "I know I am right. Why are you not thinking the same way as me?" is generally not effective at getting other people to see things from your perspective.

> Not everyone draws the line at the same spot.

Which is correct, but not a justification?

> Everyone's constraints in life are different.

In which case those constraints might be the justification, not simply the fact that their contribution is a small contribution, wouldn't it?

> Also, talking from a position of "I know I am right. Why are you not thinking the same way as me?" is generally not effective at getting other people to see things from your perspective.

Nor is staying within the constraints of the preconceived notions that make it impossible to see the problem with someone's position. But feel free to suggest alternative approaches to this problem that you have experience to be working better.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#183

Post by forgottenpass » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:32 PM UTC

hoorayimhelping wrote: post #119

> The other thing that’s new is that they’re thought leaders who are progressives and liberals; just like most of us in the tech profession I think most people in tech are probably more moderate-to-liberal and it's that progressives are the loudest voices politically right now, so it seems like tech is more left leaning than it is. Also, tech exists in places other than the coasts.

The progressive attitude of tech is an expression of cognitive dissonance. Sure, it'd be great if (eg:) Google hit their diversity goals, but that's not my point. Other than avoiding bad press and making money, what can convince huge bureaucracies to care so much about progressive bugbears?

I propose that it's a way to ignore how disgusting the software they've built is. Rather than address the monster in their basement of their own creation, they looked to the next-closest moral fight they could find and went full tilt on saving the world from that. The location of their headquarters per-determined the particular fights they would choose. Frantic activity as a defense against change.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#184

Post by jdietrich » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:39 PM UTC

mrtksn wrote: post #86

davedx wrote: post #2

Good summary of the current political climate around the tech sector. To be honest, this has been a long time coming -- I've been reading pieces with disdain for "Silicon Valley technocrats" for a while now. It is picking up pace now, though... and the EU has already fired quite a few shots. "I left out Twitter because it’s not actually a company, it’s a dysfunctional non-profit that accidentally provi…

If a company is not making money but there are lots of people trying to keep it around it probably means that the company is making money for these people but it's not reflected to the books directly or the payment is due for later time. It's bit of like building roads that on the books may look like unprofitable venture but the utility they provide makes possible for other businesses to flourish so the roads are kep…

>Do we really want to see Twitter gone?

Can we have RSS back? I mainly use Twitter as an ersatz RSS substitute, because most publishers killed off RSS in favour of social media.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#185

Post by thex10 » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:39 PM UTC

taway_1212 wrote: post #110

geomark wrote: post #21

Not to mention the many (ex) friends working for "defense" contractors. Ex because I really can't be friends with them any longer. Evil quotes deployed because calling it defense is a farce considering what the systems they are developing are used for.

I never understood the disdain for working in the arms sector. After all, weapons are just tools, it's the politicians who decide what to do with them. You should despise the king, not the gunsmith.

Believe it or not, there are some folk who abhor all violence, for whom there is literally no situation where a weapon of arms sector level sophistication could be used for good. In this case, there's simply no justification for the arms sector's existence.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#186

Post by sillysaurus3 » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:45 PM UTC

sverige wrote: post #167

throwaway613834 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so how do I get my friends to do that is the question. Conveying this requires getting them to admit there is something wrong with what their employer is doing in the first place, and at that point I'd be already past the obstacle I'm trying to figure out how to overcome.

After reading most of the comments, I think you tell them bluntly what you're thinking. If they listen to you, maybe they'll quit. If you lose their friendship, you can make new ones who don't work for evil companies. And if they keep doing evil things for a living but still want to be your friend, maybe you should be the one to end the friendship. I've done that a few times. It gets easier with practice.

If they listen to you, maybe they'll quit. If you lose their friendship, you can make new ones who don't work for evil companies.

This is what I meant by "Don't try to control your friends."

If you don't let your friends have radically different beliefs from your own, you're just making an echo chamber for yourself.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#187

Post by thex10 » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 2:46 PM UTC

indigochill wrote: post #144

Something I've been thinking lately and may as well ask here: is there a resource for finding tech positions exclusively with socially/morally net positive organizations? It seems most of the tech job ads I browse through seem to be mostly companies chasing the money rather than focusing on trying to make a net positive social impact.

Hi, I don't know about job listings, but you might be interested in Benefit Corporations[0] or B Corporations[1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_corporation#Difference...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_Corporation_(certification)

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#188

Post by csomar » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:01 PM UTC

throwaway613834 wrote: post #4

What sucks is I can't just tell my friends "you're working for an evil company -- just look at {insert 5 evil things they did in the past couple years}". It sucks even more that these are some of the kindest and most caring people I know, with better moral character than myself -- I almost feel they somehow got brainwashed into their jobs. But who would enjoy hearing that? At best they would ignore it; at worst you'd…

You understand that they are employees and not employers? Are you self-employed/entrepreneur or do you have a passive income?

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#189

Post by dalbasal » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

ashark wrote: post #174

dalbasal wrote: post #79

Data Science is evil :) There are a couple of big "tech-is-evil" forces that I think are responsible for a good chunk of this sentiment. The first is advertising. Ads are slightly evil anyway. You're going to make us watch an ad during intermission, and that'll make us buy your brand of washing powder? Sounds kind of evil. It never sat right with people, but it funded free news and entertainment so... we're used to t…

> So... data science is evil and the only way to stop it is a total ban numbers. Nah. Banning collecting, storing, and exploiting data on people for any but a small set of very narrow purposes would do the trick.

”Small set of very narrow purposes” or even “data” are too difficult to define legally. There’ll be loopholes to exploit.

Better safe than sorry. No numbers. No nerds. No evil.

Re: The tech sector might be evil

#190

Post by nf05papsjfVbc » Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 3:08 PM UTC

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #182

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone draws the line at the same spot. Everyone's constraints in life are different. Also, talking from a position of "I know I am right. Why are you not thinking the same way as me?" is generally not effective at getting other people to see things from your perspective.

> Not everyone draws the line at the same spot. Which is correct, but not a justification? > Everyone's constraints in life are different. In which case those constraints might be the justification, not simply the fact that their contribution is a small contribution, wouldn't it? > Also, talking from a position of "I know I am right. Why are you not thinking the same way as me?" is generally not effective at getting…

The use of the word 'justification' tells me that you have already judged the actions and are looking for people to explain them. This ties into the last point I was trying to make. From this, it appears (to me) unlikely that our conversation will lead to us being in agreement: we see the world quite differently.

EDIT: Since you brought up the subject of what I could suggest, I'd like to add this: I'd just talk to people and see what they think: not in terms of "explain your actions" but in terms of "help me understand".