Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by LordFast 2537 days ago
Out of all the possible solutions, let's go ahead and choose the one that further destroys people's trust in our abilities to make sound decisions!

/s

Ridiculous.

2 comments

Immoral yes. Ridiculous no.

People have a short memory and a strong affect toward symbolism.

Marketing just pulls the desired psychological tricks to reach their objective.

It works. Just like lying in politics works. Just like making corporate PR statements work. Just like in your face ads work. Just like showing boobs work.

It will work as long as people are cruising in their life instead of trying to build it. It will keep working because it goes with the flow of our internal mechanisms, and it takes conscious efforts to not be influenced by it. And it will keep being used because the value of doing so it far superior than the cost.

> People have a short memory

Just think about the "Sony Rootkit" or countless of other fiascos that have happened over time. Society forgets so easily.

Can't argue with you, that was very poignant.
Immoral-as-the-norm is itself ridiculous.
I tend to see bad apples just like tornadoes or forest fires. They are natural catastrophes, and they will always be there, not matter the society we build.

The important part is how we react to those people. In that sense, I feel we are more responsible for the problem than them. Indeed, why blame a tornado ? Better learn to behave in case of one, and make houses the proper way.

So I don't think we should focus on the immorality as much as we should make sure we create generations of persons than know how to deal with it: remember bad deeds, detect manipulations, choose what they consume, etc.

You're absolutely right to focus on making sure we know how to deal with these things. The difference is that there aren't two sides to a tornado. We should also additionally focus on the people and systems that make this happen.
Sure, but no matter how much you do this additional focus, there will be always be a few terrible persons going through the net. The only way to avoid it would be to cut down on freedom to an extreme.

It's also very expensive. The legal system, prisons, and the whole gov web is a big, slow and inflexible machine.

Removing the incentive to be an asshole is just better. But it's our job, not the job of some higher power.

Not ridicilous at all. Same tactics have worked for many multi-national companies after huge screwups and it worked.

Just a few examples: https://www.businessinsider.com/7-companies-that-changed-nam...

Not surprising that you are being down-voted for stating the obvious.

Boeing exhibits all the schizophrenic behaviour we come to expect from business as it stands in this age. And they will continue to do so as long as it maximises shareholder value, which is the only reason they exist.

Sure, corp-cucks will blab on about social license and the like, but look at how the market judged them: A $100 drop from $450 to $350, and that's it. Two planes drop from the sky, killing ~350 people, subsequent investigations reveals Boeing fired their skilled engineers and to this day have not fixed their software. The share price barely moves. Why the fuck should they change anything ?

United Fruits comes to mind, what a lovely company...
The mercenary cough I mean security company Blackwater rebranded as well. The School of the Americas (which is a US State Sponsored terrorist training organization for South and Central America) was rebranded to "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation"