It’s a shame, but fuck Google regardless of this :)
Just shows that companies show their support to please the people in power and that’s just []-washing
Opinions are still divided on whether companies should have a political opinion
TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 16:41
nextcollapse
A haunting reminder that rainbow capitalism is 100% about profit and convenience.
Corporations were never your friend. They were never going to defend you.
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 16:50
nextcollapse
They were going to defend you for as long as doing so remained profitable.
jol@discuss.tchncs.de
on 11 Feb 2025 17:35
collapse
I like to say that corporations will never go out of their way to be charitable. There’s always a bottom line, being it PR or direct profit. Even PR and Marketing spend has to eventually lead to increase in profit.
1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
on 11 Feb 2025 17:39
nextcollapse
Or avoid a decrease in profit, which is why you get so many posturing bandwagons which slow down once enough people have forgotten that it won’t affect profits anymore, eg all the statements and policy, name, logo etc changes due to BLM in mid-late 2020
jballs@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Feb 2025 22:48
collapse
I had a management class years ago in college where the professor made the argument that in order to be ethical, every single action a business makes must be done to increase profits for its shareholders.
Charitable donation? Only if it increases public perception in a way to be justified by the cost.
Pay your employees well? Only if paying them less would cause you to lose them to your competitors.
The list goes on. It’s a very depressing way to look at the world. But as time goes by, I’ve realized just how accurate that professor was. Companies don’t give a shit about you and will turn on you the second it makes their quarterly numbers look better.
That’s the problem of thinking of companies as people. Company operate like ruthless people people they usually responde to several stakeholders that all control the company like an ouija board.
ISOmorph@feddit.org
on 11 Feb 2025 17:02
nextcollapse
If you’re left leaning and want to send a message, do it with your wallet. Switch to tutanota for mails, search with duckduckgo, use f-droid as an app store… No one needs google, it’s just somewhat inconvenient to get used to alternatives
TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 17:10
nextcollapse
Way ahead of you. I already use an alternative paid email service, don’t use Android, and don’t use Google search.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 17:14
nextcollapse
As stupid as it is… You have to buy a fucking Google Pixel to really be able to get away from Google because it’s not as simple to get an alternate OS that is de-Googled on any other phones.
The Pixels, for example, are the only ones supported by GrapheneOS, widely considered one of the most secure phone operating systems with no Google nonsense in it.
LineageOS on the other hand you have to do a boatload of stuff to de-Google it.
GrapheneOS is awesome, wish more phones had it. Has really brought a feeling of control wity my phone. Just kind of ironic wearing the Google logo on the back lmao
pimento64@sopuli.xyz
on 11 Feb 2025 17:34
collapse
LineageOS on the other hand you have to do a boatload of stuff to de-Google it.
???
LineageOS doesn’t come with Google Play Services on board at all, you have to flash it (or MicroG) if you want it. Why just make shit up?
Plug for kagi.com for those who can afford to pay for search engine. Best search engine experience, love the personalized results where you manually raise and lower specific domains.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 17:55
nextcollapse
Much like the current hullabaloo about the head of ProtonMail being suspect because of his support of Trump, there’s a ton of shady shit about Kagi, too. They’re Venture Capital funded. What’s the deal with the T-shirt company? Why did they lie stupidly about stuff like “we don’t do paid advertising… oh wait whoops now we do.”
Further, the CEO of Kagi just has that techbro attitude of “You are required to listen to what I have to say.”
Discussions with Vlad are him telling you his side and expecting you to accept it as the truth and not keep arguing. His goal isn’t to discuss, it’s to keep talking at you until you agree or go away. HE thinks he discusses with people, but he talks AT people. So I don’t feel bad making a blog post and forcing him to be talked at for once (which I never even expected him or that many other people to see it, I’m trying to figure out how many hits I even got rn to see how bad he Streissand’d this).
But yeah I knew that already, and that’s why I didn’t engage with him. I know what a Vlad conversation is and I wasn’t willing to be lectured by the CEO of a company I criticized on my tiny personal blog. Thats an insane proposition. And it’s really not even irony–I suspected this is exactly what would happen. I knew that arguing with Vlad would only benefit his own ego, but I knew that bluntly repeating “I will not discuss this with you quit emailing me” will just prove what I already knew, that he does not care what people say (and probably barely reads what they say given that he linked me the same post I already read twice) and that he will do whatever he’s driven to do no matter what. The only options were he quits emailing me (great!) or he digs himself in deeper and deeper (great??? idk but it proves a point)
Ah, so Duckduckgo leadership is still the only one in thr clear?
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 18:15
nextcollapse
Yeah, I definitely haven’t seen as much sketchy stuff about their leadership, that’s for sure. It’s really hard to find a trustworthy group doing this kind of thing, partially because of the sheer amount of money needed to get such a thing off the ground to begin with… which usually ends up meaning VC money, which ends up meaning shady decisions to be able to pay it back.
Find a searx / searxng instance or run one yourself! Depending on corporate software will continue to be a cat and mouse game.
SabinStargem@lemmings.world
on 12 Feb 13:24
collapse
Aside from political leanings of services like Protonmail and Kagi, I look at one key thing: where they are headquartered. Kagi is in California, while Protonmail is in Switzerland. IMO, this means that if a civil war breaks out, they are less likely to poison or remove their service.
It is all about whether the workers and leadership are within reach of the law, be it official or the jungle.
floofloof@lemmy.ca
on 11 Feb 2025 17:59
nextcollapse
Kagi includes search results from the big search engines, which would mean Google and Bing. So while they do some of their own crawling to improve the results, some of your money will still be going to Google and Microsoft. It’s still a step in a better direction though. I don’t know whether Kagi has any plans to become more independent in future.
I tried finding API pricing for Google but it’s probably buried somewhere. They make it sound “free” but with usage limits, which surely Kagi exceeds? Either way, it’s probably on a “per-call” basis, and Google gets a lot less money that way compared to crapping out money driven search results.
“Our unique algorithms down-rank pages with a lot of ads and trackers (which we have found correlate with a decrease in content quality) and promote content from independent, ad-free sources and personal websites.”
I’m sure it’s not perfect, but my experience with Kagi has been very very good. With DuckDuckGo I’d often have to revert to Google to find what I was looking for, but not with Kagi.
I pay for Kagi, so my opinion might be clouded by confirmation bias.
SabinStargem@lemmings.world
on 12 Feb 13:16
collapse
You can also use Kagi’s video search AI to vet the political alignment of a video before watching. I don’t want to waste my time on facist-leaning content, be it political or economic.
masterofn001@lemmy.ca
on 11 Feb 2025 20:03
nextcollapse
Wallets mean nothing to people and corps with more money than the rest of humanity combined.
The people calling the shots need to be…
Uh…
You live by the sword you die by the sword.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
on 12 Feb 2025 03:42
collapse
Thanks. Made the swap to Tuta as it’s the only thing I haven’t moved away from Google yet. See Tuta mention 2 years ago they’re making a drive alternative but… that’s still not a thing. Kinda sad would definitely like that.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
on 16 Feb 02:04
collapse
Thanks for the recommendation!
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 17:04
nextcollapse
It’s not even “rainbow capitalism.”
This goes all the way back to women’s suffrage and the Civil Rights era.
They didn’t start accepting women into the workforce and blacks into the workforce because they saw them as valuable humans just for existing.
They realized they were leaving money on the table. If women had money, they could be marketed products, if blacks had money, they could marketed products. That was “opening up new markets.” Hiring them meant they would get paid and have money in their pockets to spend at your business.
Every single group that got attention and understanding was about being able to exploit them for more money. The only color they’ve ever cared about is the green on their money. This is also why it’s been such an uphill battle for anyone disabled, because if you can’t maximize your output by absolutely destroying your body and mind for capital: they don’t want you.
They never thought of us as humans, just as “Human Capital Stock.” We’re just units to be used and discarded like millions of mistreated farm animals every single day.
Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 19:16
nextcollapse
10 out of 10
Kramkar@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 22:29
nextcollapse
Reading about the Tulsa race massacre is so crazy, like World War 1 planes, some say up to 12, others at least 8 of them doing stuff like: “… turpentine or nitroglycerin bombs being dropped and men shooting from planes”. Some also suspect the use of dynamite, so it’s possible they were quite literally dropping bombs.
syklemil@discuss.tchncs.de
on 11 Feb 2025 20:25
nextcollapse
Yeah, it’s essentially a weathervane or thermometer. You can indicate the state of a country by it.
At this point the US has joined the ranks of, well, grim theocracies. Not that the people at the top in the US worship anything but Mammon.
Fluffy_Ruffs@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 20:59
collapse
Right. If you react to this news with disappointment, and believe me I’m disappointed, maybe it’s more a wake up call the support was never real to begin with. I feel we’re better off without such hollow gestures. Then again I’m not a part of a marginalized group and maybe it’s not that black and white.
TachyonTele@lemm.ee
on 11 Feb 2025 16:51
nextcollapse
Honestly I wish they had a setting for only federal holidays. The ones where banks close.
I also want to be able to switch back to general holidays too though. These people at google are chicken shit cowards.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 17:50
collapse
Honestly I wish they had a setting for only federal holidays. The ones where banks close.
This is a screenshot from today. Get fucked Google. What a fucking lie. You’re busy changing information to capitulate to a government that wants certain information hidden.
YaDownWitCPP@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 17:23
collapse
It’s true though, Google search does make it easy to discover a broad.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 17:25
collapse
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 11 Feb 2025 17:55
collapse
Don’t forget your Shingles vaccination before you lay them! You don’t want a Shingle Transmitted Infection. You know, an ShTI (pronounced Esh-T-I).
Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 16:58
nextcollapse
Companies have decided to cut the crap and just focus on their core mission of being evil
Kolonel_Kahlua@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 17:09
nextcollapse
Sooooo.
Any recommendations on a replacement for Google calendar?
I’ve got shot of maps with that Gulf of Mexico business. The search engine due to ads, the mail client for the same reasons (still using the mail address but Fairmail as a client).
Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca
on 11 Feb 2025 18:21
nextcollapse
Nextcloud Has been fairly reliable for me
TurtleMelon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Feb 2025 19:35
collapse
buddascrayon@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 23:02
nextcollapse
It’s no longer available on FDroid for some reason.
3aqn5k6ryk@lemmy.world
on 12 Feb 2025 02:57
collapse
on account it has been bought. Consider fossify apps. same dev and foss.
3aqn5k6ryk@lemmy.world
on 12 Feb 2025 02:56
collapse
It has been bought. Please switch to fossify apps. Same dev and foss.
TurtleMelon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 13 Feb 03:40
collapse
Right, thank you. Fossify is what I use, force of habit with the old name.
gaspar_petersen@programming.dev
on 11 Feb 2025 17:40
nextcollapse
I don’t understand why was this ever a thing. Fuck google, and fuck rainbow washing. They never really cared, and where just taking advantage of a noble cause.
shoulderoforion@fedia.io
on 11 Feb 2025 17:45
nextcollapse
well, it's not that they removed anything, it's that the company google paid to create the holiday events told google how much it was costing to include every substrata of celebration (i.e. national bean day, national micronesia first peoples remembrance), so google said, you know what, we're just going to have federal holidays on our calendar and people can add the rest as they like. which i think is fair enough.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 17:51
collapse
I’m sure it cost them a whole $500 to update the entire system every single year after adding the feature.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
on 12 Feb 2025 03:52
collapse
1gb or 5gb for $5 a month is kinda rough tho, as a heads up to anyone looking, it is there more as a means to encrypted collaboration, not large storage and sharing of files.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
on 12 Feb 2025 03:38
collapse
Tuta is supposed to be developing one that’s using their post-quantum encryption but it’s been 2 years so, womp.
truthfultemporarily@feddit.org
on 12 Feb 09:42
collapse
AES is already post quantum crypto so that sounds a bit marketingy.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
on 12 Feb 14:07
collapse
Their tuta email already is post quantum so it’s not that they can’t do the security part. Idk honestly, it’s probably just the logistics of getting a lot more servers if they’re trying to make a secure cloud. I just know they posted they’ll be developing that in the future 2 years ago, now would be a great time for it to release as an alternative.
karpintero@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 19:11
nextcollapse
Remember when they removed “don’t be evil” from their code of conduct back in 2018
Etterra@discuss.online
on 11 Feb 2025 20:25
nextcollapse
They didn’t. They moved it from the foreword to the final line.
To be clear, Google is absolutely evil, and the unofficial motto was always worthless. I am just annoyed everyone ate the clickbait reporting about something that never happened and is repeating it to this day. I guess “Google moved Don’t be evil Clause to a less prominent spot” doesn’t click as well.
I cannot believe this is the first time I’ve heard this.
eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Feb 2025 19:26
nextcollapse
Every time a straight person has wondered why I hate rainbow capitalism, shit like this is why.
“Oh but it moves your kind forward, you should be thankful they support you now!” They only supported us when the government wouldn’t take away contracts and people were sure they supported queers.
Same thing for every other company and every other minority. I can at least mask that I’m queer, black people can’t mask being black.
God I hate being right about horrible things.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
on 11 Feb 2025 20:06
collapse
Not very "ally" of you bruh
eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Feb 2025 20:08
nextcollapse
Did I say something stupid? I wrote this 10 minutes after waking up and not had coffee.
I am a white dude who happens to be a disabled queer, I try to include the fact they are targeted more for something they can’t hide, I can mask the things that other me.
If there’s something I can swap around or edit, lemme know.
VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca
on 11 Feb 2025 20:16
nextcollapse
I can’t say if it was bad sarcasm or plain stupidity, but I for one understood and totally agree with your first statement.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
on 11 Feb 2025 20:26
collapse
It was sarcasm... Corpo spent years pretending to be an ally and then just like that... No longer an ally
eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 11 Feb 2025 20:48
collapse
My apologies, I’m never quite good at tones, even in person. Thank you for responding nicely!
samus12345@lemm.ee
on 11 Feb 2025 20:17
nextcollapse
They also removed Holocaust Remembrance Day. Probably because it’s going to have to be renamed Holocaust I soon.
frog_brawler@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 20:44
nextcollapse
Lmao, damn… I was done with them before this announcement but thanks for reinforcing my decision.
teri@discuss.tchncs.de
on 11 Feb 2025 21:23
nextcollapse
Google managed to create a very clean image of themselves in most heads, but looking closer it is an ugly profit maximization machine. It cares about shareholders. If it cares about you, then probably for spying on you and learn how to manipulate you and others better. I hope people start realizing finally.
And let’s state it clear: Google could have a voice. They could object to the Musk-Thiel-Trumpian destruction machine. They could be there for the world. But they’re not. Not at all. They serve the money. And if it pays off, then they are willing to ruin peoples lives.
Google is on the wrong side of history.
sfxrlz@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 21:28
nextcollapse
Seems like their motto isn’t „don’t be Evil“ anymore for a reason.
teri@discuss.tchncs.de
on 11 Feb 2025 21:32
nextcollapse
It was limiting them. To truly maximize profits they need to strip off all limits.
I’m not joking.
Really not.
This is why capitalism and fascism go so well together.
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Feb 04:38
collapse
Can they even argue they following washed version of “do the right thing”
Well „the right thing“ says nothing. Doing the right thing can be making tons of money, which it apparently also is.
Eagle0110@lemmy.world
on 12 Feb 07:59
nextcollapse
I agree with your points, but what do you think are some of the specific things Google or other similar tech companies in such a similar capacity could realistically and meaningfully do object the Musk-Thiel-Trumpian destruction machine?
I would like to learn more
teri@discuss.tchncs.de
on 12 Feb 09:00
nextcollapse
They could decide not to give 1M to Trump, but they did: theguardian.com/…/google-microsoft-donate-trump-i…
They could use their reach and make a clear public statement: “we don’t support this”. But I’ve never seen any.
They could give higher rating to actual useful information and try to show less fascist propaganda to people. I have to assume that’s going wrong as well.
Because of their giant impact, they send a message to all others. “We go with the fascists, we are not on the side of humanity but on the side of profit”. That creates dangerous dynamics.
Google has always been fuckers, they are still fuckers and going with the fascist flow they’ve proven that they will remain fuckers. Even if they switch side once the Trumpian monster stumbles, the can never be trusted.
This days it’s plain obvious. Before was slightly better hidden.
Literally nothing. A corporation, especially a publicly traded one like that, can’t do much but maximize (ideally long-term, but usually short-term) shareholder returns.
The Activision-Microsoft merger is a good recent example of this. During the anti trust trial, the CEO of Activision literally came out and said that he believes it’s a bad idea that will be bad for the industry and bad for the company in the long term, using the impact of consolidation in Hollywood as an example, but he has to side with the board. He’s basically legally obligated to.
I’m not saying it’s unjust or a bad system (and I’m definitely not trying to paint Bobby Kotick as a good guy), I just want to point out that corporations are very simple in their purpose, and nobody should be expecting anything more from them. If you’re disappointed that Google made this 180, that’s on you for falling in love with a corporation. They’re useful tools for producing goods and services, but terrible as a political tool for democracy.
But for some reason, it became popular to fetishize tech companies, and that spawned megalomaniacs like Elon, Zuckerberg, Horowitz, Thiel, etc who feel like they should be the supreme rulers of our civilization.
SabinStargem@lemmings.world
on 12 Feb 13:11
collapse
I am hoping that Google bites the dust from this. Having stuff like Peertube becoming common, would go a long way towards mitigating media moguls from controlling narratives. As we have seen, the media organs of the right are staying silent or downlplaying what has been happening.
Also, it would be nice if the folk didn’t have to deal with baseless copyright takedowns. A lot of culture has been lost to feckless corpotacracy.
criss_cross@lemmy.world
on 11 Feb 2025 22:03
nextcollapse
I’m not angry at this point. Just sad.
It’s disheartening how quickly everything was washed away.
Teppichbrand@feddit.org
on 11 Feb 2025 22:16
collapse
HonorableScythe@lemm.ee
on 11 Feb 2025 22:58
nextcollapse
This was always going to happen. Companies in Germany when Hitler rose to power didn’t protest and speak up against him - they needed to sell his army goods. They made his uniforms and cars and didn’t say a peep about the extermination of people around them. The companies that spoke up were crushed. A corporation’s bottom line is their bottom line, no matter what horrors they need to assist in perpetrating.
Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
on 12 Feb 2025 02:51
nextcollapse
The Nazis organized a closed door meeting with the leading German industrialists and told them about their plans to rebuild the German military to take revenge for WW I. They agreed and many of those same asswipes escaped the post war prosecution.
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Feb 04:37
nextcollapse
Now these closed meetings happen at MaraLargo
SabinStargem@lemmings.world
on 12 Feb 13:06
collapse
Most of the key people behind the Civil War and 1st Business Plot also were excused from justice, for the sake of soothing political tension. IMO, executing them would have been better for curtailing the corrosion of our society.
They did not merely passively “assist”. They established factories in close proximity to the death camps so that they could profit off of the slave labour deemed too fit for immediate extermination.
It is a bit nuts how hard it is to switch email accounts. Although conveniently I believe gmail has a forwarding feature. Protonmail unfortunately doesn’t in its free tier (I recently switched from protonmail to self-hosted postfix/dovecot), and paying for a protonmail subscription just to forward my emails to a different email seems to defeat the point of paying for an email service.
ScreaminOctopus@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Feb 12:37
nextcollapse
What’s your setup for self hosting? Do you use a vps or host on your own network?
VPS in order to go offshore due to being a political organiser/having state interest in me. If my domestic state was not interested in me I would use a home lab though; it’d wind up cheaper in the long run I reckon, better performance as it’s bare metal (though my VPS is KVM so performance hit is negligible), and better control since you both own and have physical access to the server. For most people’s purposes I’m sure an old laptop or a raspberry pi would work fine so you don’t need to splash out either. I probably wouldn’t suggest a VPS unless you have the same threat model as me (ie likely to get raided & server seized, or likely to have active monitoring of your internet activity via ISP); I don’t really think it’s worth the money long term. Or I guess if you do just have general privacy concerns you could rent a VPS in a country known for decent privacy, but just for peace of mind reasons instead of a tangible threat to you.
Edit: Also depends on what you use the server for. If you want it to not be linked to your real identity you’d probably want a VPS, otherwise every time someone emails you they find out the IP address of your home network.
SabinStargem@lemmings.world
on 12 Feb 13:01
collapse
I used Thunderbird to simultaneously access and download my gmail and protonmail, gradually migrating my ecosystem to the latter. The way I figure, Protonmail would be good, on account of being based in Switzerland. That means assorted EU protections - and now with Vichy America likely to become a thing, having the servers in a safe spot seems really helpful.
The odds of us having military action in our neighborhoods has shot up by a disturbing degree.
It’s not migrating my emails I need, it’s forwarding new emails sent to my old address. I mostly use duck addresses these days so luckily I can just change the address ddg forwards to in future, but prior to starting to use ddg’s email service I’d have a ton of services I need to change the email address for. Proton offers this service but I’d have to pay a subscription for it, and obviously I need it indefinitely if some service sends me an email eg 5 years down the line. Of course emails sent to an old email 5 years later are probably not important but it’s just convenient to not have to log into Protonmail to check if I’ve got any mail sent to my old address.
prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Feb 16:20
collapse
I bought a domain and use Fastmail, I’ve just been switching what I need and letting the rest go to a dead Gmail.
I went to proton about a year ago, and I don’t love it. I’m not ready to leave yet, but I’ll tell you to do as much research as you can and consider a paid service if you have to. I wish I had.
Corporations, at their core, are profit-generating engines—nothing more, nothing less. The corporate board’s one legal imperative is to ensure the shareholders see a return on their investment, by any means necessary. Morality? A marketing gimmick when convenient- not an operating principle.
All companies are evil. Google is not any more or less evil than any other company. The difference is they have a significant power base and therefore have a lot to gain or lose in the transition to fascism. They understand that Trump is spiteful and willing to bend and even break the law to punish those who defy him. They also understand he rewards those who bend the knee. Therefore, the most profitable path of action is bending the knee.
This should not surprise anybody. You substitute Google for any large corporation and they would have done the same thing. Don’t believe me? Google around (while you still can freely search for information) for the Coca-Cola saga in Colombia, where union leaders were getting forcibly suicided by narco-paramilitary death squads hired by Coca-Cola.
You know- the commercials that make you feel all warm and fuzzy around Christmas time with the polar bears and Santa Claus? Yeah, they’ll murder you if you threaten their bottom line. It’s just what they do.
There’s a simple math equation:
Let
P = Probability of getting caught,
F = Expected fine or penalty,
R = Potential revenue or profit,
Constants
α = The weight assigned to the probability of getting caught ( P ). If this constant is high, the corporation is more cautious… if it’s low, the corporation is willing to make more risks. In Colombia, this is much lower than in the US.
β = The weight assigned to the probable size of the penalty ( F ). A high β means there’s a serious potential danger. However, if β is low (like when Ford decided the cost of simply paying lawsuits from deaths due to known car malfunctions was probably lower than the price of recalls) then they’ll be more likely to push forward
γ = The weight assigned to the impact on their bottom line ( R ). For example, if Boeing thinks they will lose a lot of money from whistleblowers, they will find a way to suicide them. If the impact is small, then it’s not worth the potential risks.
C = ( αP ⋅ βF ) − γR
Let’s give an imaginary example. Let’s say a corporation is considering dumping toxic waste illegally into a river, potentially giving thousands of people cancer. Let’s say they’re gonna save $10M a year from doing this.
R = 10,000,000
The probability of getting caught is 10%
P = 0.10
The expected fine is $5M
F = 5,00,000
Let’s try out some constants
α = 1.5 ⇒ they’re somewhat cautious about getting caught
β = 1.2 ⇒ they’re moderately concerned about the penalty
γ = 2.0 ⇒ they’re really motivated by profit (maybe their profits went down 10% last year, a big no-no)
C is less than 0? Dump that toxic waste, baby. It’s the logical position if you’re trying to maximize profit. Sometimes you will get caught, but imagine you did this in a simulation 1,000 times. Most of the times, you will be more profitable because of it and therefore you dump the waste.
It’s like a poker player. If you get AA, you raise pre-flop. Sometimes you will lose on the flop to some dunce who goes in with 2-7… but in the long term, most of the time, you will win. Therefore it’s the right move.
This is what companies do. People need to realize and internalize this. They are profit generating engines. Nothing more, nothing less. They are not your friends. They don’t care about the environment. They don’t care about the future of the world or anything. Literally nothing at all.
They are a math formula and if destroying everything you love happens to be the most profitable move most of the time, they will do it without second guessing. Because they aren’t people. They are a machine.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Feb 14:35
nextcollapse
All companies are evil.
Disagree. Publicly traded companies are amoral, so whether they do something good or evil depends on what’s profitable.
Healthy competition tends to make “evil” actions unprofitable. Google doesn’t have healthy competition, hence the current situation.
These companies aren’t the bad guys in the same way that weeds in your garden aren’t “bad.” If you don’t want weeds to take over, make sure there’s sufficient competition and incentives so desirable plants crowd them out, and stay on top of the handful of weeds that take root. We’ve neglected the garden for decades and allowed some truly nasty weeds in, but that doesn’t make the weeds “evil,” that means we were poor gardeners.
To me, apathy and amorality when the consequences are harm towards others is evil. It’s sort of like if a driver was in a rush and ran over a protestor on his way to work.
Sure, he did not wish any harm on the protestor. He just simply needed to get past them and chose the most effective and efficient path.
It’s an amoral act but the act (and the driver) is still evil. Evil is not just a mustache twirling genocidal dictator or sadistic serial killers… In fact, the amoral does infinitely more harm than the malicious. The Nazis did not come to power because of malice. They did not kill millions of Jews because of malice. They got there through apathy and amorality.
They didn’t want to kill the Jews at first- they wanted to deport them. But once they got them in the camps… it was impractical to supply enough logistical power to actually move them all. So while they figure out a plan, let’s have them do slave labor.
And then after a while, since we can’t move them, we may as well just kill them. It’s the most effective path to where we want to be. The driver driving over the protestor.
If this isn’t “evil”, what is?
Healthy competition tends to make “evil” actions unprofitable
Competition helps. I agree that this negative aspect of capitalism is exponentially magnified when monopolies form.
The thing is, in capitalist the wealth tends to snowball. Wealth is power and wealth buys influence. Look at how Disney singlehandedly changed copyright law when Mickey Mouse was about to enter public domain. Once you reach a certain size, you can modify the rules of the game. So it creates a self-perpetuating cycle.
This position we are in is the natural consequence of free market capitalism. I agree that free market is better. But this is the grown up version of free market. There was never going to be any other scenario but the one we are in.
We’ve neglected the garden for decades and allowed some truly nasty weeds in, but that doesn’t make the weeds “evil,” that means we were poor gardeners.
We can debate on the ontology of the world evil. It really is an interesting debate. But for all practical purposes, if the weeds are killing the crops that feed your family… what is the difference? Whether they want to kill you indirectly through starvation or don’t want to kill you- you’re dead either way.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 13 Feb 00:20
collapse
The issue with your driver analogy is that the driver has to make a conscious decision that their convenience is worth more than a human life. I don’t think anyone would disagree that the driver is evil.
Likewise for your Nazi example, the choice to arrest and deport people because of their religious, ethnic, or cultural affiliation is evil. That should absolutely go without saying, as should killing people for convenience or profit.
Corporations are rarely in that situation, and if they actively choose to kill people, the decision makers should join the driver and Nazis in prison.
wealth tends to snowball
As it should. And snowballs tend to burst on impact. Look at GE or Sears, they used to absolutely dominate, but they imploded because they couldn’t adapt to the competition.
That’s how it’s supposed to work, innovators profit massively from the value they create, and when they stop innovating, they fail.
The problem is that large businesses rarely fail and get bailed out. We should’ve had a ton of banks close in 2008, but instead their execs got golden parachutes and failing businesses just consolidated into even larger entities. The message that sends is that companies can get away with murder, as long as they are “too big to fail.” The problem there wasn’t the cheating (it was a problem, don’t get me wrong), but the lack of consequences. We should’ve seen execs being carted off to jail, having their assets confiscated to help make restitution for their crimes. But instead we rewarded them.
This isn’t a failure of capitalism, it’s corruption in government.
Once you reach a certain size, you can modify the rules of the game.
And that’s the problem. My point is: don’t hate the player, hate the game. Demand better representation, and real consequences for corruption.
I’m guessing if you looked into Google/Alphabet, you could find dozens if not hundreds of crimes committed that helped them get the market share they have, and most of those likely went unprosecuted or had ineffective penalties. Likewise for other large orgs like Microsoft and Amazon.
Yet everyone seems to blame the corporations and not the government. You blame Disney for our terrible copyright laws, yet Disney didn’t pass or sign that law, they merely lobbied for it. The problem isn’t Disney, the problem is Congress.
, if the weeds are killing the crops that feed your family… what is the difference?
Weeds killing your crops is a symptom of the problem, which is the lack of maintenance of the garden. The weeds didn’t kill your family, your lack of preventative action did.
Likewise, corporations taking advantage of an ineffective government isn’t the problem, the ineffective government is. Fix ththe gardener and the garden will prosper. But a bad gardener is worse than no gardener, because nature at least finds a way for crops to survive without anyone plucking the weeds.
You blame Disney for our terrible copyright laws, yet Disney didn’t pass or sign that law, they merely lobbied for it. The problem isn’t Disney, the problem is Congress.
I think one thing we need to get out of the way is that the political system and the economic system are intertwined. There is no way to have a democratic capitalist society without having one influence the other.
If we go back to Adam Smith- he’s seen as the father of economics. But he didn’t consider himself an economist. He considered a moral philosopher and a political economist. The political system and the economic system are one and the same.
You believe these large corporations gaining too much influence is because of poor maintenance. Because of a corrupt government. You believe it’s because we’re not enforcing our anti-trust laws and so on.
I disagree and say this was always inevitable. It is impossible to keep your garden free of weeds starting from a free market economy. Again- wealth snowballs and wealth buys influence.
It’s a simple cause and effect. As long as the profit incentive is the main motivator in our political economy, the political system will be shaped by those with the most money. And they have the incentive to remove those free-market systems in order to maximize their own profit.
It’s a deterministic cycle. Free market capitalism -> late stage capitalism -> fascism
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 13 Feb 09:10
collapse
the political system and the economic system are intertwined
Sure, but that overlap should be as small as possible while still ensuring a competitive market.
late stage capitalism
Socialists and other related academics have been throwing this term around since WW2, and every couple decades they move the goalposts. It’s little more than a scary story they tell to convince people to go along with their authoritarian ideas. It’s really not that different from Hitler blaming Jews for all of society’s problems, just with a socialist flavor instead of a fascist one.
The truth is that wealthy people need the working class to buy their stuff, and buying their stuff increases the workers’ standard of living. Standard of living has been rising pretty consistently in developed countries, especially those with relatively free markets.
Yes, wealth inequality is growing (which is a problem), but that doesn’t mean the poor are getting poorer. Quite the opposite in fact, if you look at the data, people of all economic classes are better off year over year.
A lot of the problem is self inflicted IMO. The process goes something like this:
People demand change
Politicians talk to big players in industry
Big players propose solutions that seem to fix the problem
Surprised pikachu when the changes largely entrench the big players and raise the barrier to entry for competitors
And then we have the corrupt two party system where most representatives don’t have much actual competition for their seat, as long as they have more funding (conveniently provided by helpful lobbies from 3). The longer a rep stays in office, the more they tend to listen to the big players.
It’s not impossible to fix the problems, we just need to stop trying to use government to solve everything. Government works best when it’s simple, special interests love complexity, so we should simplify the law so it’s easier for people to tell when they’re getting screwed.
For example, the IRA is an incredibly simple retirement program. You open an account at a brokerage or bank for free and then buy stuff, and taxes are either up front or upon withdrawal. Some brokerages are cheaper than others, so you can shop around for the features and costs you want. The 401k is incredibly complex, and because it’s negotiated by employers, a lot end up being expensive for customers (e.g. mine has a 0.10% asset fee on top of fund fees), all because financial institutions want a cut. The plan is selected by HR, and employees don’t get a choice other than participate or not. Taxes are complex because Turbo Tax wants to keep their customers. And so on.
Here’s a quote from the author of my favorite book:
Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
The problem isn’t with corporations, they’re largely a constant. The problem is with government getting bloated and losing the plot because everyone tries to use it to solve their pet problem and the net winners are the lobbies.
It’s little more than a scary story they tell to convince people to go along with their authoritarian ideas
This is where I think you may have misinterpreted me. I’m not trying to push socialism. I think we’re genuinely fucked and there is no way out.
Sure, but that overlap should be as small as possible while still ensuring a competitive market
This is a fantasy. We talk about “free market capitalism” as if it’s some pristine, untouched mechanism that would work perfectly fine if only the government followed the rules. But the moment big money arises, the entire political field is lured in. Wealth itself becomes a gravitational force that pulls legislators, laws, and lobbyists into its orbit.
This is not a bug, it’s a feature. It’s fundamental to the system. A free market can never remain a free market. For two very simple reasons.
a) economies of scale. It’s cheaper to a lot of something per thing compared to a little of something per thing. so there is a financial incentive to get bigger and that is a self-perpetuating cycle. Eventually at the end of the game of Monopoly, there’s only one landlord standing who bought everything else up.
b) wealth is power. if you have power, you will use it to ensure your position is improved. this is human nature. this works the same in any other political economic system.
It’s not that a pure free market is corrupted by government, or that a pure socialism is corrupted by incompetent central planners; both are myths in the sense that they never truly exist in the real world. We either get forms of crony capitalism or state-managed capitalism, but the “free” part is always an abstraction.
What we need to acknowledge is that the political and economic systems are not two separate worlds that only overlap by accident. They’re conjoined twins. Pretending one can neatly excise government from the economy is a fantasy—just as fantastical as imagining the perfect socialist utopia.
The trick is to recognize that the moment large-scale wealth accumulates, it necessarily accumulates political clout. And from there, the “free market” gradually becomes a marketplace that’s anything but free.
This is what people mean by late stage capitalism. It’s capitalism that has eroded all of the public institutions and in a short amount of time fascism will take root. We’re witnessing the transition right now as we speak.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 13 Feb 17:42
collapse
This is a fantasy
It used to be reality. Copyright law was reasonable and largely unchanged for 180 years, it lasted 28 years, with an optional extension for another 28 years. Originally it was 14 years, with an optional extension for another 14 years. The same is true for a number of other stupid laws that large corporations exploit.
But the moment big money arises, the entire political field is lured in
Agreed, and maybe we should consider constitutional limits on what governments can do. You won’t bribe someone who is legally restricted from helping you…
But honestly, the root of the problem, I think, is the two-party system, which encourages corruption, especially when state governments get to redraw federal districts. We shouldn’t be pushing for individual changes to separate government from big money until we solve the problem with party politics.
Some suggestions:
proportional representation for House Reps - you vote in your party primary to rank candidates, and seats are awarded in the general based on percent of popular vote; eliminates gerrymandering, with the risk of candidates being geographically consolidated (totally worthwhile tradeoff, and IMO not something that actually matters)
term limits - not a solution in and of itself (creates a pipeline to industry, encouraging corruption), but could be useful in addition to the first
campaign finance reform - ban political ads, and only allow organized debates and town halls, with a central location for info about each candidate (w/ fact checking by other candidates)
end FPTP - preference for STAR or Approval voting, but the specific option isn’t important; needs to be paired w/ a solution to gerrymandering though, because on its own, this doesn’t do much
Wealth itself becomes a gravitational force that pulls legislators, laws, and lobbyists into its orbit.
That’s true of any economic system. You said you’re not pushing socialism, but you didn’t offer what you do support, so I’ll speak broadly.
Power attracts money, and money attracts power. These are constants in human nature, and they need to be watched very closely. My point is that increasing the ability of governments to make changes that benefit or hurt the market attracts big money, so we should be very careful of anything we ask our governments to do. Having a political system that encourages entrenched politicians just exacerbates the problem. And moving more and more powers to the executive branch reduces the amount of work companies need to put in to get a desired result (e.g. Trump can be bought).
My opinion is that, in general, rules should be crafted and enforced as locally as possible, which would then dramatically increase the work required for a large entity to get what they want. Federal policy should be simple and limited to only what’s needed for a functioning union, and likewise down the chain.
there is a financial incentive to get bigger and that is a self-perpetuating cycle. Eventually at the end of the game of Monopoly, there’s only one landlord standing who bought everything else up.
What you’re missing is that as companies get bigger, they lose sight of their competitive advantage. Look at big household names from 50 years ago (or sooner!) that don’t really exist today. Capitalism works by smaller upstarts finding a competitive advantage, exploiting it, and then the cycle repeats.
The way large orgs compete now is by buying small orgs. We could consider blocking corporations from buying other corporations, which should encourage more disruption vs larger orgs (i.e. erode wealth of the big players), since they can’t just buy their competitors.
It’s capitalism that has eroded all of the public institutions and in a short amount of time fascism will take root.
I really don’t think the two are related. Look at fascism before WW2, they didn’t need to erode capitalism first, they just ran on a populist platform, identified a common enemy, and used the platform and enemy as an excuse to eliminate democracy, at which point they could nationalize whatever industries they want. The transition to fascism throughout history has been through political means, not the market.
I suppose it’s possible for it to happen in the other order, but I don’t think it’s inevitable. We had a similar situation w/ Standard Oil taking over everything, and we ended up doing some trust busting to fix the issue. It’s not too late to change course, we just need the public to recognize the problem and demand change.
You said you’re not pushing socialism, but you didn’t offer what you do support, so I’ll speak broadly.
I’m a bit of a pessimist here. I think free market capitalism is a terrible system that will inevitably crash and fail. It is also the best thing we have come up with so far. Essentially Churchill’s quote. I only hope that after our next foray into fascism we will come out the other side with a new 21st century ideology that is somehow able to fix the fundamental contradictions.
I really support Liberalism (and I mean you know, freedom of speech, free market, pursuit of happiness, etc). I would always prefer to live in a society that gives me the freedom to live life on my terms. In theory, we could have a socialist version of this, but I think like we discussed it falls victim to precisely the same fate. When the Soviets initially took power, they were genuine in their desire for revolutionary emancipation. They did many great things- they created written languages for all of the local ethnicities that didn’t have them. They put local leaders in positions of power. They increased literacy and invested in education strictly for altruism.
That only lasted a couple short decades, however, because the wheels of power inevitably turn. I shouldn’t have to go into detail on the horrific abuses of power that resulted from the developed Soviet state
Here’s the thing, I think you make great points. And the solutions you propose would benefit the system both in the short and long term. But I think collapse is inevitable anyway, and specifically collapse into fascism. Perhaps in a system where the institutions are strong and we have policies in the line of what you’re suggesting (campaign finance reform, proportional representation, etc. I’d even say higher salaries for politicians counter intuitively) the descent will be slowed for a long period of time.
But ultimately, it’s the classic criminal versus police officer. You can put up a border wall to stop drugs coming in, they’ll go under the ground. You put ground penetrating radar sensors, they build DIY-submarines. You invest in a coast guard, they build drones. Etc Etc
It’s a constant battle that requires constant vigilance. However, here’s the kicker. Here’s the reason why it will always inevitably fail.
The people with significant wealth and by extension power- they will always have incentive to change the system to their advance and they will always have the ability to influence it. They will never stop trying to come up with new ways to either exploit current laws or create new ones.
The average people, the consumers and voters, they will sometimes have the incentive to change the system and they will sometimes have the ability to influence it. In times of trouble, people get upset and they start protesting. They start voting for new measures, different policies get enacted. Like you mentioned, we broke up Standard Oil. Or when we broke up the Bell Telephone Company.
During that time people were both discontent, which means they had the incentive to change the system and coincidentally that also gives them the ability to influence the system- politicians are only scared into making positive change for the average person when there is large scale dissent.
But what happened to both of those examples (and virtually every other anti-trust regulation we’ve ever tried to implement)?
Today, Bell Telephone’s descendant is AT&T- a behemoth of a megacorp that participates in an oligopoly over the telecommunications market. Today, Standard Oil’s descendant is Exxon Mobil and remains the largest oil and gas company in the US.
What happened here? Well, the public interest eventually fades. Some other crisis shows up on the news channels and people become content with their lives. If the economy is doing well, people are paying their bills, etc, they don’t care. If they economy isn’t, the politicians have become exceedingly proficient at redirecting that discontent towards scapegoats (today it’s immigrants for example).
So, it’s a simple math equation. Let’s say the corporations win 51% of the coin flips and the free market / law abiding public wins 49% of the time. For a very long time, it can stay more or less even. Cops versus robbers- the equilibrium stays intact.
But imagine a limit that goes to infinity. What happens? Eventually the interest of wealth wins. Now, different societies can have different coin flip ratios.
I think our society is nowhere near 51% / 49%. I think your solutions would bring us closer to that 50 / 50 but due to again, the very nature of the capitalist system- the law will never be in the driving seat.
Two very simple axioms determine that, which we have discussed above
wealth tends to accumu
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 14 Feb 17:38
collapse
we could have a socialist version of this, but I think like we discussed it falls victim to precisely the same fate
Yeah, the most likely formulation is free market socialism, as in, lots of worker-owned co-ops, but goods are traded in a free market. Those co-ops need to be relatively small, to avoid any one org from having too much control.
I’d even say higher salaries for politicians counter intuitively
Agreed. And cops. You tend to get what you pay for.
Put up a border wall to stop drugs coming in, they’ll go under the ground
Sure, and the way to stop drugs from coming in is to make that trade unprofitable. Legalize drugs, and provide safe ways to use even the hardest drugs. If you do that, the few people who want it can get it in a safe way (i.e. trip out at your local pharmacy), and you don’t get all of the violence that comes with black market trade.
But no, “drugs bad,” and the public wants to control “bad” things. The government shouldn’t be deciding what is “good” or “bad,” but how to provide a desired service in a way that doesn’t hurt others. Ideally, we end up with open borders because criminals no longer have an incentive to relocate (at least more-so than regular immigrants).
They will never stop trying to come up with new ways to either exploit current laws or create new ones.
True, and that’s going to be the case regardless of the system you choose. The bigger the potential profit, the more care needs to be taken in crafting and enforcing laws.
Standard Oil’s descendant is Exxon Mobil and remains the largest oil and gas company in the US.
They don’t also own the railroads and whatnot. The issue w/ Standard Oil was the sheer amount of infrastructure they controlled, not that they were the biggest player in their market. As long as the profit motive is to produce goods at competitive rates, it’s not a problem that they’re raking in crazy profits. But once they get a monopoly, the incentive changes to killing competition so they can raise prices, which also gives them massive leverage against government (no more oil unless I get <concession>).
For a very long time, it can stay more or less even.
The way it seems to work like the typical boom/bust business cycle. In the stock market, we tend to get 7-10 years of boom, followed by 1-2 years of bust, and the cycle repeats. Likewise, we get a build-up of problems, and then we pass some key legislation or do a high-profile anti-trust breakup, and the system kind of resets.
The issue we’re left with is whether these corrections are sufficient, or if, like stock valuations, there’s an upward trend of giving corporations too much power. I worry there is, because we don’t seem willing to make the painful changes we need to get a deep enough correction (e.g. we should’ve let more banks fail in 2008, fix election process, etc).
I guess the main difference is that I think things are salvageable. However, we need to rethink the interaction between government and the market, and stop expecting government to solve all our problems. Government is a pretty big hammer, and we need to be very careful breaking it out since it can cause a lot of problems in a hurry.
I guess the main difference is that I think things are salvageable
To be honest, I think we are very ideologically aligned. I agree that government power is something that should be used with very precise care. Look at what happens for example when we introduce Pell Grants, giving lower income kids the opportunity to go to college.
That sounds great, right? Who doesn’t support that? Well, I sure want poor kids to be afforded the opportunity to go to school.
But look at what actually happens. Now you have a whole new class of people with a sizable chunk of government money. The demand for college goes up. Tuition rates skyrocket. The few thousand you get from the Pell Grant is now meaningless and it counter intuitively costs you more even with the grant.
Who benefits? Not the kids. Not the working class. The college administrators.
Kamala was campaigning “taxes incentives for first time homeowners!” Great. Who is going to say to no to that, right? Support young families. Sure.
What would inevitably happen? Large increase in spending => large increase in price. So if they get a $10,000 tax credit but the houses are $15,000 more expensive- what’s the difference? These are arbitrary numbers, obviously, and not borne out of some analysis.
But who would benefit? Not young families. Banks and land owners.
Government action, usually disguised as something to help is almost always going to be twisted to hurt average people.
But yes, I agree 100%. I rather like Chomsky’s take on this. I’m not an anarchist but he has advocated before for a system where every single use of government power should be consistently and continually challenged. Every single time the government spends a dollar, it needs to be transparent and justified and there needs to be a way to challenge it.
The thing is, government spending is not inherently a bad thing. Government action sometimes is exactly what is needed. For example in an economic crisis, government stimulus can be enough to turn things around or at least ameliorate the situation for the working class.
But and the big but - and the but that basically had made me lose all faith in democracy over the last 10 years or so is the way you put it
But no, “drugs bad,” and the public wants to control “bad” things
Politicians do not do what is rational. They do what is popular. These are two separate things entirely. And even worse, they can modify what is popular with a variety of mechanisms. For a simple example- look at the death tax. You ask average Americans whether they support a death tax, they will say of course not. It sounds absurd, right?
If you call it an inheritance tax, all of a sudden majority of people support it.
So yeah, I think you’re right in that we more or less align on what the ideal system should be but you still believe in the ideals of the Enlightenment and believe that egalitarianism and liberty is possible.
I think humanity is brutal and stupid by nature and we are bound to be ruled by people with strength. I think all government systems eventually deteriorate into fancy feudalism.
For a bit of an absurd statement- I think what we need to do is create a constitution that is very explicit. And then what we need to do is let an AI enforce it. Assuming the AI is objective and not able to be influenced, I think then and only then would we have a free society. And the irony is- we wouldn’t be in control of it.
Maybe I’m just a pessimist about human nature. Don’t misinterpret me, I consider myself a humanist. I like humans. I feel empathy for others. I want the best world possible for everyone.
But I think humans in a group are stupid. The crowd is like a locust swarm, destroying without thinking. It’s sad
SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 13 Feb 00:26
collapse
Great write up, I appreciate the modeling.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 12 Feb 13:01
nextcollapse
I would only want actual state/local holidays anyway.
If I actually care about an event I am more than capable to set the event mysekf (e.g. Sysadmin day)
Remove Google (Alphabet), Apple, Microsoft, Facebook (Meta), and Amazon from your life (and more, of course, but these are the big tech ones). Difficult but 100% necessary these days. De-Google your Android phone/tablet (basically Android without Google is possible), use Linux, order from small businesses, don’t use social media owned by big corporations, etc.
Got any recommendations? I looked into this but found only graphene or calyx as real contenders but it requires a pixel phone. Not that I’m absolutely am against pixel hardware but having to buy a new phone while I still have 3 or so years of software support on my current phone seems a bit silly: - /
threaded - newest
It’s a shame, but fuck Google regardless of this :)
Just shows that companies show their support to please the people in power and that’s just []-washing
Opinions are still divided on whether companies should have a political opinion
A haunting reminder that rainbow capitalism is 100% about profit and convenience.
Corporations were never your friend. They were never going to defend you.
They were going to defend you for as long as doing so remained profitable.
I like to say that corporations will never go out of their way to be charitable. There’s always a bottom line, being it PR or direct profit. Even PR and Marketing spend has to eventually lead to increase in profit.
Or avoid a decrease in profit, which is why you get so many posturing bandwagons which slow down once enough people have forgotten that it won’t affect profits anymore, eg all the statements and policy, name, logo etc changes due to BLM in mid-late 2020
I had a management class years ago in college where the professor made the argument that in order to be ethical, every single action a business makes must be done to increase profits for its shareholders.
Charitable donation? Only if it increases public perception in a way to be justified by the cost.
Pay your employees well? Only if paying them less would cause you to lose them to your competitors.
The list goes on. It’s a very depressing way to look at the world. But as time goes by, I’ve realized just how accurate that professor was. Companies don’t give a shit about you and will turn on you the second it makes their quarterly numbers look better.
That’s the problem of thinking of companies as people. Company operate like ruthless people people they usually responde to several stakeholders that all control the company like an ouija board.
If you’re left leaning and want to send a message, do it with your wallet. Switch to tutanota for mails, search with duckduckgo, use f-droid as an app store… No one needs google, it’s just somewhat inconvenient to get used to alternatives
Way ahead of you. I already use an alternative paid email service, don’t use Android, and don’t use Google search.
As stupid as it is… You have to buy a fucking Google Pixel to really be able to get away from Google because it’s not as simple to get an alternate OS that is de-Googled on any other phones.
The Pixels, for example, are the only ones supported by GrapheneOS, widely considered one of the most secure phone operating systems with no Google nonsense in it.
LineageOS on the other hand you have to do a boatload of stuff to de-Google it.
GrapheneOS is awesome, wish more phones had it. Has really brought a feeling of control wity my phone. Just kind of ironic wearing the Google logo on the back lmao
???
LineageOS doesn’t come with Google Play Services on board at all, you have to flash it (or MicroG) if you want it. Why just make shit up?
Plug for kagi.com for those who can afford to pay for search engine. Best search engine experience, love the personalized results where you manually raise and lower specific domains.
Much like the current hullabaloo about the head of ProtonMail being suspect because of his support of Trump, there’s a ton of shady shit about Kagi, too. They’re Venture Capital funded. What’s the deal with the T-shirt company? Why did they lie stupidly about stuff like “we don’t do paid advertising… oh wait whoops now we do.”
Further, the CEO of Kagi just has that techbro attitude of “You are required to listen to what I have to say.”
mastodon.social/…/112258758788834454
Seriously, his behavior is unhinged.
Ah, so Duckduckgo leadership is still the only one in thr clear?
Yeah, I definitely haven’t seen as much sketchy stuff about their leadership, that’s for sure. It’s really hard to find a trustworthy group doing this kind of thing, partially because of the sheer amount of money needed to get such a thing off the ground to begin with… which usually ends up meaning VC money, which ends up meaning shady decisions to be able to pay it back.
Well, appreciate the headsup. The battle is always staying informed.
While at it, any recommended alternatives to ProtonMail?
Tutanota is a common recommended alternative, (which is now just called “Tuta”).
Tutanota, as specified in my initial reply
I have had reasonable experiences with startpage as a search engine.
Find a searx / searxng instance or run one yourself! Depending on corporate software will continue to be a cat and mouse game.
Aside from political leanings of services like Protonmail and Kagi, I look at one key thing: where they are headquartered. Kagi is in California, while Protonmail is in Switzerland. IMO, this means that if a civil war breaks out, they are less likely to poison or remove their service.
It is all about whether the workers and leadership are within reach of the law, be it official or the jungle.
Kagi includes search results from the big search engines, which would mean Google and Bing. So while they do some of their own crawling to improve the results, some of your money will still be going to Google and Microsoft. It’s still a step in a better direction though. I don’t know whether Kagi has any plans to become more independent in future.
Ah, does Duckduckgo not do that too anymore? I thought there wasn’t a fully independent search engine.
I can’t think of a fully independent one.
DDG uses Bing primarily.
help.kagi.com/kagi/…/search-sources.html
I tried finding API pricing for Google but it’s probably buried somewhere. They make it sound “free” but with usage limits, which surely Kagi exceeds? Either way, it’s probably on a “per-call” basis, and Google gets a lot less money that way compared to crapping out money driven search results.
“Our unique algorithms down-rank pages with a lot of ads and trackers (which we have found correlate with a decrease in content quality) and promote content from independent, ad-free sources and personal websites.”
I’m sure it’s not perfect, but my experience with Kagi has been very very good. With DuckDuckGo I’d often have to revert to Google to find what I was looking for, but not with Kagi.
I pay for Kagi, so my opinion might be clouded by confirmation bias.
You can also use Kagi’s video search AI to vet the political alignment of a video before watching. I don’t want to waste my time on facist-leaning content, be it political or economic.
Wallets mean nothing to people and corps with more money than the rest of humanity combined.
The people calling the shots need to be… Uh…
You live by the sword you die by the sword.
Thanks. Made the swap to Tuta as it’s the only thing I haven’t moved away from Google yet. See Tuta mention 2 years ago they’re making a drive alternative but… that’s still not a thing. Kinda sad would definitely like that.
I use filen.io as a web drive. Can recommend
Thanks for the recommendation!
It’s not even “rainbow capitalism.”
This goes all the way back to women’s suffrage and the Civil Rights era.
They didn’t start accepting women into the workforce and blacks into the workforce because they saw them as valuable humans just for existing.
They realized they were leaving money on the table. If women had money, they could be marketed products, if blacks had money, they could marketed products. That was “opening up new markets.” Hiring them meant they would get paid and have money in their pockets to spend at your business.
Every single group that got attention and understanding was about being able to exploit them for more money. The only color they’ve ever cared about is the green on their money. This is also why it’s been such an uphill battle for anyone disabled, because if you can’t maximize your output by absolutely destroying your body and mind for capital: they don’t want you.
Further, if you get enough money to do some capitalism yourself and create something like “Black Wall Street” they’ll bomb the living fuck out of you to put a stop to it.
They never thought of us as humans, just as “Human Capital Stock.” We’re just units to be used and discarded like millions of mistreated farm animals every single day.
10 out of 10
POTD
Reading about the Tulsa race massacre is so crazy, like World War 1 planes, some say up to 12, others at least 8 of them doing stuff like: “… turpentine or nitroglycerin bombs being dropped and men shooting from planes”. Some also suspect the use of dynamite, so it’s possible they were quite literally dropping bombs.
Yeah, it’s essentially a weathervane or thermometer. You can indicate the state of a country by it.
At this point the US has joined the ranks of, well, grim theocracies. Not that the people at the top in the US worship anything but Mammon.
Right. If you react to this news with disappointment, and believe me I’m disappointed, maybe it’s more a wake up call the support was never real to begin with. I feel we’re better off without such hollow gestures. Then again I’m not a part of a marginalized group and maybe it’s not that black and white.
Honestly I wish they had a setting for only federal holidays. The ones where banks close.
I also want to be able to switch back to general holidays too though. These people at google are chicken shit cowards.
Those are bank holidays.
Ok
We’re a long long way from those lofty goals of yesteryear, aren’t we Google?
The audacity to still have this quote up, right now, is off the charts.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/ab3534f2-c0a7-4fcd-a02e-bf2583ba004d.webp">
This is a screenshot from today. Get fucked Google. What a fucking lie. You’re busy changing information to capitulate to a government that wants certain information hidden.
It’s true though, Google search does make it easy to discover a broad.
Hot broads in your area want to talk to you!
Hot shingles? In MY area? And I can lay them?
Don’t forget your Shingles vaccination before you lay them! You don’t want a Shingle Transmitted Infection. You know, an ShTI (pronounced Esh-T-I).
Companies have decided to cut the crap and just focus on their core mission of being evil
Sooooo.
Any recommendations on a replacement for Google calendar?
I’ve got shot of maps with that Gulf of Mexico business. The search engine due to ads, the mail client for the same reasons (still using the mail address but Fairmail as a client).
Nextcloud Has been fairly reliable for me
I use
Simple Calendar from Simple Mobile Tools.Fossify Calendar.It’s no longer available on FDroid for some reason.
on account it has been bought. Consider fossify apps. same dev and foss.
It has been bought. Please switch to fossify apps. Same dev and foss.
Right, thank you. Fossify is what I use, force of habit with the old name.
I don’t understand why was this ever a thing. Fuck google, and fuck rainbow washing. They never really cared, and where just taking advantage of a noble cause.
well, it's not that they removed anything, it's that the company google paid to create the holiday events told google how much it was costing to include every substrata of celebration (i.e. national bean day, national micronesia first peoples remembrance), so google said, you know what, we're just going to have federal holidays on our calendar and people can add the rest as they like. which i think is fair enough.
I’m sure it cost them a whole $500 to update the entire system every single year after adding the feature.
What a savings!
By Grabthar’s hammer…
Bow!
Is there an alternative to Google Drive that doesn’t lock me into using MS Office. I particularly need to ability to share and edit files online.
Cryptpad
1gb or 5gb for $5 a month is kinda rough tho, as a heads up to anyone looking, it is there more as a means to encrypted collaboration, not large storage and sharing of files.
Tuta is supposed to be developing one that’s using their post-quantum encryption but it’s been 2 years so, womp.
AES is already post quantum crypto so that sounds a bit marketingy.
Their tuta email already is post quantum so it’s not that they can’t do the security part. Idk honestly, it’s probably just the logistics of getting a lot more servers if they’re trying to make a secure cloud. I just know they posted they’ll be developing that in the future 2 years ago, now would be a great time for it to release as an alternative.
Remember when they removed “don’t be evil” from their code of conduct back in 2018
Pepperidge Farm remembers. And so do I.
“Do you remember a time when women couldn’t vote and certain people weren’t allowed on golf courses? Petridge Farm remembers. It was back in 2025.”
<img alt="" src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4f-SVsAUoDw/maxresdefault.jpg">
They didn’t. They moved it from the foreword to the final line.
To be clear, Google is absolutely evil, and the unofficial motto was always worthless. I am just annoyed everyone ate the clickbait reporting about something that never happened and is repeating it to this day. I guess “Google moved Don’t be evil Clause to a less prominent spot” doesn’t click as well.
I cannot believe this is the first time I’ve heard this.
Every time a straight person has wondered why I hate rainbow capitalism, shit like this is why.
“Oh but it moves your kind forward, you should be thankful they support you now!” They only supported us when the government wouldn’t take away contracts and people were sure they supported queers.
Same thing for every other company and every other minority. I can at least mask that I’m queer, black people can’t mask being black.
God I hate being right about horrible things.
Not very "ally" of you bruh
Did I say something stupid? I wrote this 10 minutes after waking up and not had coffee.
I am a white dude who happens to be a disabled queer, I try to include the fact they are targeted more for something they can’t hide, I can mask the things that other me.
If there’s something I can swap around or edit, lemme know.
I can’t say if it was bad sarcasm or plain stupidity, but I for one understood and totally agree with your first statement.
It was sarcasm... Corpo spent years pretending to be an ally and then just like that... No longer an ally
My apologies, I’m never quite good at tones, even in person. Thank you for responding nicely!
You dropped this
🫱🏻/s
Next thing you know Facebook is going to get rid of Daughter’s Day!
Wow Google’s licking boot like there’s no tomorrow.
Fucking shameful.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/a2efc7d3-83e6-4f17-a8dd-6aaa87f049d2.jpeg">
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/94aed2aa-64d0-4fe9-add7-e8545d65ab27.jpeg">
Downloading these, don’t mind me
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1eba3479-f3e2-4811-ada7-3381e164776a.webp">
They also removed Holocaust Remembrance Day. Probably because it’s going to have to be renamed Holocaust I soon.
Lmao, damn… I was done with them before this announcement but thanks for reinforcing my decision.
Google managed to create a very clean image of themselves in most heads, but looking closer it is an ugly profit maximization machine. It cares about shareholders. If it cares about you, then probably for spying on you and learn how to manipulate you and others better. I hope people start realizing finally.
And let’s state it clear: Google could have a voice. They could object to the Musk-Thiel-Trumpian destruction machine. They could be there for the world. But they’re not. Not at all. They serve the money. And if it pays off, then they are willing to ruin peoples lives.
Google is on the wrong side of history.
Seems like their motto isn’t „don’t be Evil“ anymore for a reason.
It was limiting them. To truly maximize profits they need to strip off all limits. I’m not joking. Really not. This is why capitalism and fascism go so well together.
Can they even argue they following washed version of “do the right thing”
Well „the right thing“ says nothing. Doing the right thing can be making tons of money, which it apparently also is.
I agree with your points, but what do you think are some of the specific things Google or other similar tech companies in such a similar capacity could realistically and meaningfully do object the Musk-Thiel-Trumpian destruction machine?
I would like to learn more
They could decide not to give 1M to Trump, but they did: theguardian.com/…/google-microsoft-donate-trump-i… They could use their reach and make a clear public statement: “we don’t support this”. But I’ve never seen any. They could give higher rating to actual useful information and try to show less fascist propaganda to people. I have to assume that’s going wrong as well.
Because of their giant impact, they send a message to all others. “We go with the fascists, we are not on the side of humanity but on the side of profit”. That creates dangerous dynamics.
Google has always been fuckers, they are still fuckers and going with the fascist flow they’ve proven that they will remain fuckers. Even if they switch side once the Trumpian monster stumbles, the can never be trusted.
This days it’s plain obvious. Before was slightly better hidden.
Literally nothing. A corporation, especially a publicly traded one like that, can’t do much but maximize (ideally long-term, but usually short-term) shareholder returns.
The Activision-Microsoft merger is a good recent example of this. During the anti trust trial, the CEO of Activision literally came out and said that he believes it’s a bad idea that will be bad for the industry and bad for the company in the long term, using the impact of consolidation in Hollywood as an example, but he has to side with the board. He’s basically legally obligated to.
I’m not saying it’s unjust or a bad system (and I’m definitely not trying to paint Bobby Kotick as a good guy), I just want to point out that corporations are very simple in their purpose, and nobody should be expecting anything more from them. If you’re disappointed that Google made this 180, that’s on you for falling in love with a corporation. They’re useful tools for producing goods and services, but terrible as a political tool for democracy.
But for some reason, it became popular to fetishize tech companies, and that spawned megalomaniacs like Elon, Zuckerberg, Horowitz, Thiel, etc who feel like they should be the supreme rulers of our civilization.
I am hoping that Google bites the dust from this. Having stuff like Peertube becoming common, would go a long way towards mitigating media moguls from controlling narratives. As we have seen, the media organs of the right are staying silent or downlplaying what has been happening.
Also, it would be nice if the folk didn’t have to deal with baseless copyright takedowns. A lot of culture has been lost to feckless corpotacracy.
I’m not angry at this point. Just sad.
It’s disheartening how quickly everything was washed away.
Wait, rainbow capitalism wasn’t sincere?!
This was always going to happen. Companies in Germany when Hitler rose to power didn’t protest and speak up against him - they needed to sell his army goods. They made his uniforms and cars and didn’t say a peep about the extermination of people around them. The companies that spoke up were crushed. A corporation’s bottom line is their bottom line, no matter what horrors they need to assist in perpetrating.
The Nazis organized a closed door meeting with the leading German industrialists and told them about their plans to rebuild the German military to take revenge for WW I. They agreed and many of those same asswipes escaped the post war prosecution.
Now these closed meetings happen at MaraLargo
Most of the key people behind the Civil War and 1st Business Plot also were excused from justice, for the sake of soothing political tension. IMO, executing them would have been better for curtailing the corrosion of our society.
They did not merely passively “assist”. They established factories in close proximity to the death camps so that they could profit off of the slave labour deemed too fit for immediate extermination.
Any one who doesn’t know what happened should go watch Schindler’s List.
Corporations are not people. They are machines
I’ve already deleted Google maps. Deleting calendar will be tough.
Just get hosted Nextcloud somewhere and DAVx5.
I’ve never heard if this, but that doesn’t sound like a bad idea.
Works a treat.
Nextcloud is a massive overkill for caldav. You can use something lightweight like Baikal.
Yes, but Nextcloud is being offered as a hosted service by various Providers. Not everybody even here wants to or can run their own services.
The only thing I need to drop is my gmail account. Everything else went into the circular file.
It is a bit nuts how hard it is to switch email accounts. Although conveniently I believe gmail has a forwarding feature. Protonmail unfortunately doesn’t in its free tier (I recently switched from protonmail to self-hosted postfix/dovecot), and paying for a protonmail subscription just to forward my emails to a different email seems to defeat the point of paying for an email service.
What’s your setup for self hosting? Do you use a vps or host on your own network?
VPS in order to go offshore due to being a political organiser/having state interest in me. If my domestic state was not interested in me I would use a home lab though; it’d wind up cheaper in the long run I reckon, better performance as it’s bare metal (though my VPS is KVM so performance hit is negligible), and better control since you both own and have physical access to the server. For most people’s purposes I’m sure an old laptop or a raspberry pi would work fine so you don’t need to splash out either. I probably wouldn’t suggest a VPS unless you have the same threat model as me (ie likely to get raided & server seized, or likely to have active monitoring of your internet activity via ISP); I don’t really think it’s worth the money long term. Or I guess if you do just have general privacy concerns you could rent a VPS in a country known for decent privacy, but just for peace of mind reasons instead of a tangible threat to you.
Edit: Also depends on what you use the server for. If you want it to not be linked to your real identity you’d probably want a VPS, otherwise every time someone emails you they find out the IP address of your home network.
I used Thunderbird to simultaneously access and download my gmail and protonmail, gradually migrating my ecosystem to the latter. The way I figure, Protonmail would be good, on account of being based in Switzerland. That means assorted EU protections - and now with Vichy America likely to become a thing, having the servers in a safe spot seems really helpful.
The odds of us having military action in our neighborhoods has shot up by a disturbing degree.
It’s not migrating my emails I need, it’s forwarding new emails sent to my old address. I mostly use duck addresses these days so luckily I can just change the address ddg forwards to in future, but prior to starting to use ddg’s email service I’d have a ton of services I need to change the email address for. Proton offers this service but I’d have to pay a subscription for it, and obviously I need it indefinitely if some service sends me an email eg 5 years down the line. Of course emails sent to an old email 5 years later are probably not important but it’s just convenient to not have to log into Protonmail to check if I’ve got any mail sent to my old address.
I bought a domain and use Fastmail, I’ve just been switching what I need and letting the rest go to a dead Gmail.
It’s been fairly easy.
A good alternative. I moved across too.
Youtube is the only thing there isn’t a really viable alternative to at this stage.
I’m happy to say I’m officially degoogled in my personal life/computer.
I still have legacy accounts with gmail that I can’t migrate though.
They sent it all to the Gulf of Mexico…
Fuuuuuck… I was really hoping I didn’t need to migrate away from gmail… But looks like this is it.
I went to proton about a year ago, and I don’t love it. I’m not ready to leave yet, but I’ll tell you to do as much research as you can and consider a paid service if you have to. I wish I had.
Fuuuuuckkkk I wish I could degoogle again
Don’t be evil, lol
Corporations, at their core, are profit-generating engines—nothing more, nothing less. The corporate board’s one legal imperative is to ensure the shareholders see a return on their investment, by any means necessary. Morality? A marketing gimmick when convenient- not an operating principle.
All companies are evil. Google is not any more or less evil than any other company. The difference is they have a significant power base and therefore have a lot to gain or lose in the transition to fascism. They understand that Trump is spiteful and willing to bend and even break the law to punish those who defy him. They also understand he rewards those who bend the knee. Therefore, the most profitable path of action is bending the knee.
This should not surprise anybody. You substitute Google for any large corporation and they would have done the same thing. Don’t believe me? Google around (while you still can freely search for information) for the Coca-Cola saga in Colombia, where union leaders were getting forcibly suicided by narco-paramilitary death squads hired by Coca-Cola.
You know- the commercials that make you feel all warm and fuzzy around Christmas time with the polar bears and Santa Claus? Yeah, they’ll murder you if you threaten their bottom line. It’s just what they do.
There’s a simple math equation:
Let
P = Probability of getting caught,
F = Expected fine or penalty,
R = Potential revenue or profit,
Constants
α = The weight assigned to the probability of getting caught ( P ). If this constant is high, the corporation is more cautious… if it’s low, the corporation is willing to make more risks. In Colombia, this is much lower than in the US.
β = The weight assigned to the probable size of the penalty ( F ). A high β means there’s a serious potential danger. However, if β is low (like when Ford decided the cost of simply paying lawsuits from deaths due to known car malfunctions was probably lower than the price of recalls) then they’ll be more likely to push forward
γ = The weight assigned to the impact on their bottom line ( R ). For example, if Boeing thinks they will lose a lot of money from whistleblowers, they will find a way to suicide them. If the impact is small, then it’s not worth the potential risks.
Let’s give an imaginary example. Let’s say a corporation is considering dumping toxic waste illegally into a river, potentially giving thousands of people cancer. Let’s say they’re gonna save $10M a year from doing this.
R = 10,000,000
The probability of getting caught is 10%
P = 0.10
The expected fine is $5M
F = 5,00,000
Let’s try out some constants
α = 1.5 ⇒ they’re somewhat cautious about getting caught
β = 1.2 ⇒ they’re moderately concerned about the penalty
γ = 2.0 ⇒ they’re really motivated by profit (maybe their profits went down 10% last year, a big no-no)
Plug in the values
C is less than 0? Dump that toxic waste, baby. It’s the logical position if you’re trying to maximize profit. Sometimes you will get caught, but imagine you did this in a simulation 1,000 times. Most of the times, you will be more profitable because of it and therefore you dump the waste.
It’s like a poker player. If you get AA, you raise pre-flop. Sometimes you will lose on the flop to some dunce who goes in with 2-7… but in the long term, most of the time, you will win. Therefore it’s the right move.
This is what companies do. People need to realize and internalize this. They are profit generating engines. Nothing more, nothing less. They are not your friends. They don’t care about the environment. They don’t care about the future of the world or anything. Literally nothing at all.
They are a math formula and if destroying everything you love happens to be the most profitable move most of the time, they will do it without second guessing. Because they aren’t people. They are a machine.
Disagree. Publicly traded companies are amoral, so whether they do something good or evil depends on what’s profitable.
Healthy competition tends to make “evil” actions unprofitable. Google doesn’t have healthy competition, hence the current situation.
These companies aren’t the bad guys in the same way that weeds in your garden aren’t “bad.” If you don’t want weeds to take over, make sure there’s sufficient competition and incentives so desirable plants crowd them out, and stay on top of the handful of weeds that take root. We’ve neglected the garden for decades and allowed some truly nasty weeds in, but that doesn’t make the weeds “evil,” that means we were poor gardeners.
To me, apathy and amorality when the consequences are harm towards others is evil. It’s sort of like if a driver was in a rush and ran over a protestor on his way to work.
Sure, he did not wish any harm on the protestor. He just simply needed to get past them and chose the most effective and efficient path.
It’s an amoral act but the act (and the driver) is still evil. Evil is not just a mustache twirling genocidal dictator or sadistic serial killers… In fact, the amoral does infinitely more harm than the malicious. The Nazis did not come to power because of malice. They did not kill millions of Jews because of malice. They got there through apathy and amorality.
They didn’t want to kill the Jews at first- they wanted to deport them. But once they got them in the camps… it was impractical to supply enough logistical power to actually move them all. So while they figure out a plan, let’s have them do slave labor.
And then after a while, since we can’t move them, we may as well just kill them. It’s the most effective path to where we want to be. The driver driving over the protestor.
If this isn’t “evil”, what is?
Competition helps. I agree that this negative aspect of capitalism is exponentially magnified when monopolies form.
The thing is, in capitalist the wealth tends to snowball. Wealth is power and wealth buys influence. Look at how Disney singlehandedly changed copyright law when Mickey Mouse was about to enter public domain. Once you reach a certain size, you can modify the rules of the game. So it creates a self-perpetuating cycle.
This position we are in is the natural consequence of free market capitalism. I agree that free market is better. But this is the grown up version of free market. There was never going to be any other scenario but the one we are in.
We can debate on the ontology of the world evil. It really is an interesting debate. But for all practical purposes, if the weeds are killing the crops that feed your family… what is the difference? Whether they want to kill you indirectly through starvation or don’t want to kill you- you’re dead either way.
The issue with your driver analogy is that the driver has to make a conscious decision that their convenience is worth more than a human life. I don’t think anyone would disagree that the driver is evil.
Likewise for your Nazi example, the choice to arrest and deport people because of their religious, ethnic, or cultural affiliation is evil. That should absolutely go without saying, as should killing people for convenience or profit.
Corporations are rarely in that situation, and if they actively choose to kill people, the decision makers should join the driver and Nazis in prison.
As it should. And snowballs tend to burst on impact. Look at GE or Sears, they used to absolutely dominate, but they imploded because they couldn’t adapt to the competition.
That’s how it’s supposed to work, innovators profit massively from the value they create, and when they stop innovating, they fail.
The problem is that large businesses rarely fail and get bailed out. We should’ve had a ton of banks close in 2008, but instead their execs got golden parachutes and failing businesses just consolidated into even larger entities. The message that sends is that companies can get away with murder, as long as they are “too big to fail.” The problem there wasn’t the cheating (it was a problem, don’t get me wrong), but the lack of consequences. We should’ve seen execs being carted off to jail, having their assets confiscated to help make restitution for their crimes. But instead we rewarded them.
This isn’t a failure of capitalism, it’s corruption in government.
And that’s the problem. My point is: don’t hate the player, hate the game. Demand better representation, and real consequences for corruption.
I’m guessing if you looked into Google/Alphabet, you could find dozens if not hundreds of crimes committed that helped them get the market share they have, and most of those likely went unprosecuted or had ineffective penalties. Likewise for other large orgs like Microsoft and Amazon.
Yet everyone seems to blame the corporations and not the government. You blame Disney for our terrible copyright laws, yet Disney didn’t pass or sign that law, they merely lobbied for it. The problem isn’t Disney, the problem is Congress.
Weeds killing your crops is a symptom of the problem, which is the lack of maintenance of the garden. The weeds didn’t kill your family, your lack of preventative action did.
Likewise, corporations taking advantage of an ineffective government isn’t the problem, the ineffective government is. Fix ththe gardener and the garden will prosper. But a bad gardener is worse than no gardener, because nature at least finds a way for crops to survive without anyone plucking the weeds.
I think one thing we need to get out of the way is that the political system and the economic system are intertwined. There is no way to have a democratic capitalist society without having one influence the other.
If we go back to Adam Smith- he’s seen as the father of economics. But he didn’t consider himself an economist. He considered a moral philosopher and a political economist. The political system and the economic system are one and the same.
You believe these large corporations gaining too much influence is because of poor maintenance. Because of a corrupt government. You believe it’s because we’re not enforcing our anti-trust laws and so on.
I disagree and say this was always inevitable. It is impossible to keep your garden free of weeds starting from a free market economy. Again- wealth snowballs and wealth buys influence.
It’s a simple cause and effect. As long as the profit incentive is the main motivator in our political economy, the political system will be shaped by those with the most money. And they have the incentive to remove those free-market systems in order to maximize their own profit.
It’s a deterministic cycle. Free market capitalism -> late stage capitalism -> fascism
Sure, but that overlap should be as small as possible while still ensuring a competitive market.
Socialists and other related academics have been throwing this term around since WW2, and every couple decades they move the goalposts. It’s little more than a scary story they tell to convince people to go along with their authoritarian ideas. It’s really not that different from Hitler blaming Jews for all of society’s problems, just with a socialist flavor instead of a fascist one.
The truth is that wealthy people need the working class to buy their stuff, and buying their stuff increases the workers’ standard of living. Standard of living has been rising pretty consistently in developed countries, especially those with relatively free markets.
Yes, wealth inequality is growing (which is a problem), but that doesn’t mean the poor are getting poorer. Quite the opposite in fact, if you look at the data, people of all economic classes are better off year over year.
A lot of the problem is self inflicted IMO. The process goes something like this:
And then we have the corrupt two party system where most representatives don’t have much actual competition for their seat, as long as they have more funding (conveniently provided by helpful lobbies from 3). The longer a rep stays in office, the more they tend to listen to the big players.
It’s not impossible to fix the problems, we just need to stop trying to use government to solve everything. Government works best when it’s simple, special interests love complexity, so we should simplify the law so it’s easier for people to tell when they’re getting screwed.
For example, the IRA is an incredibly simple retirement program. You open an account at a brokerage or bank for free and then buy stuff, and taxes are either up front or upon withdrawal. Some brokerages are cheaper than others, so you can shop around for the features and costs you want. The 401k is incredibly complex, and because it’s negotiated by employers, a lot end up being expensive for customers (e.g. mine has a 0.10% asset fee on top of fund fees), all because financial institutions want a cut. The plan is selected by HR, and employees don’t get a choice other than participate or not. Taxes are complex because Turbo Tax wants to keep their customers. And so on.
Here’s a quote from the author of my favorite book:
The problem isn’t with corporations, they’re largely a constant. The problem is with government getting bloated and losing the plot because everyone tries to use it to solve their pet problem and the net winners are the lobbies.
This is where I think you may have misinterpreted me. I’m not trying to push socialism. I think we’re genuinely fucked and there is no way out.
This is a fantasy. We talk about “free market capitalism” as if it’s some pristine, untouched mechanism that would work perfectly fine if only the government followed the rules. But the moment big money arises, the entire political field is lured in. Wealth itself becomes a gravitational force that pulls legislators, laws, and lobbyists into its orbit.
This is not a bug, it’s a feature. It’s fundamental to the system. A free market can never remain a free market. For two very simple reasons.
a) economies of scale. It’s cheaper to a lot of something per thing compared to a little of something per thing. so there is a financial incentive to get bigger and that is a self-perpetuating cycle. Eventually at the end of the game of Monopoly, there’s only one landlord standing who bought everything else up.
b) wealth is power. if you have power, you will use it to ensure your position is improved. this is human nature. this works the same in any other political economic system.
It’s not that a pure free market is corrupted by government, or that a pure socialism is corrupted by incompetent central planners; both are myths in the sense that they never truly exist in the real world. We either get forms of crony capitalism or state-managed capitalism, but the “free” part is always an abstraction.
What we need to acknowledge is that the political and economic systems are not two separate worlds that only overlap by accident. They’re conjoined twins. Pretending one can neatly excise government from the economy is a fantasy—just as fantastical as imagining the perfect socialist utopia.
The trick is to recognize that the moment large-scale wealth accumulates, it necessarily accumulates political clout. And from there, the “free market” gradually becomes a marketplace that’s anything but free.
This is what people mean by late stage capitalism. It’s capitalism that has eroded all of the public institutions and in a short amount of time fascism will take root. We’re witnessing the transition right now as we speak.
It used to be reality. Copyright law was reasonable and largely unchanged for 180 years, it lasted 28 years, with an optional extension for another 28 years. Originally it was 14 years, with an optional extension for another 14 years. The same is true for a number of other stupid laws that large corporations exploit.
Agreed, and maybe we should consider constitutional limits on what governments can do. You won’t bribe someone who is legally restricted from helping you…
But honestly, the root of the problem, I think, is the two-party system, which encourages corruption, especially when state governments get to redraw federal districts. We shouldn’t be pushing for individual changes to separate government from big money until we solve the problem with party politics.
Some suggestions:
That’s true of any economic system. You said you’re not pushing socialism, but you didn’t offer what you do support, so I’ll speak broadly.
Power attracts money, and money attracts power. These are constants in human nature, and they need to be watched very closely. My point is that increasing the ability of governments to make changes that benefit or hurt the market attracts big money, so we should be very careful of anything we ask our governments to do. Having a political system that encourages entrenched politicians just exacerbates the problem. And moving more and more powers to the executive branch reduces the amount of work companies need to put in to get a desired result (e.g. Trump can be bought).
My opinion is that, in general, rules should be crafted and enforced as locally as possible, which would then dramatically increase the work required for a large entity to get what they want. Federal policy should be simple and limited to only what’s needed for a functioning union, and likewise down the chain.
What you’re missing is that as companies get bigger, they lose sight of their competitive advantage. Look at big household names from 50 years ago (or sooner!) that don’t really exist today. Capitalism works by smaller upstarts finding a competitive advantage, exploiting it, and then the cycle repeats.
The way large orgs compete now is by buying small orgs. We could consider blocking corporations from buying other corporations, which should encourage more disruption vs larger orgs (i.e. erode wealth of the big players), since they can’t just buy their competitors.
I really don’t think the two are related. Look at fascism before WW2, they didn’t need to erode capitalism first, they just ran on a populist platform, identified a common enemy, and used the platform and enemy as an excuse to eliminate democracy, at which point they could nationalize whatever industries they want. The transition to fascism throughout history has been through political means, not the market.
I suppose it’s possible for it to happen in the other order, but I don’t think it’s inevitable. We had a similar situation w/ Standard Oil taking over everything, and we ended up doing some trust busting to fix the issue. It’s not too late to change course, we just need the public to recognize the problem and demand change.
I’m a bit of a pessimist here. I think free market capitalism is a terrible system that will inevitably crash and fail. It is also the best thing we have come up with so far. Essentially Churchill’s quote. I only hope that after our next foray into fascism we will come out the other side with a new 21st century ideology that is somehow able to fix the fundamental contradictions.
I really support Liberalism (and I mean you know, freedom of speech, free market, pursuit of happiness, etc). I would always prefer to live in a society that gives me the freedom to live life on my terms. In theory, we could have a socialist version of this, but I think like we discussed it falls victim to precisely the same fate. When the Soviets initially took power, they were genuine in their desire for revolutionary emancipation. They did many great things- they created written languages for all of the local ethnicities that didn’t have them. They put local leaders in positions of power. They increased literacy and invested in education strictly for altruism.
That only lasted a couple short decades, however, because the wheels of power inevitably turn. I shouldn’t have to go into detail on the horrific abuses of power that resulted from the developed Soviet state
Here’s the thing, I think you make great points. And the solutions you propose would benefit the system both in the short and long term. But I think collapse is inevitable anyway, and specifically collapse into fascism. Perhaps in a system where the institutions are strong and we have policies in the line of what you’re suggesting (campaign finance reform, proportional representation, etc. I’d even say higher salaries for politicians counter intuitively) the descent will be slowed for a long period of time.
But ultimately, it’s the classic criminal versus police officer. You can put up a border wall to stop drugs coming in, they’ll go under the ground. You put ground penetrating radar sensors, they build DIY-submarines. You invest in a coast guard, they build drones. Etc Etc
It’s a constant battle that requires constant vigilance. However, here’s the kicker. Here’s the reason why it will always inevitably fail.
The people with significant wealth and by extension power- they will always have incentive to change the system to their advance and they will always have the ability to influence it. They will never stop trying to come up with new ways to either exploit current laws or create new ones.
The average people, the consumers and voters, they will sometimes have the incentive to change the system and they will sometimes have the ability to influence it. In times of trouble, people get upset and they start protesting. They start voting for new measures, different policies get enacted. Like you mentioned, we broke up Standard Oil. Or when we broke up the Bell Telephone Company.
During that time people were both discontent, which means they had the incentive to change the system and coincidentally that also gives them the ability to influence the system- politicians are only scared into making positive change for the average person when there is large scale dissent.
But what happened to both of those examples (and virtually every other anti-trust regulation we’ve ever tried to implement)?
Today, Bell Telephone’s descendant is AT&T- a behemoth of a megacorp that participates in an oligopoly over the telecommunications market. Today, Standard Oil’s descendant is Exxon Mobil and remains the largest oil and gas company in the US.
What happened here? Well, the public interest eventually fades. Some other crisis shows up on the news channels and people become content with their lives. If the economy is doing well, people are paying their bills, etc, they don’t care. If they economy isn’t, the politicians have become exceedingly proficient at redirecting that discontent towards scapegoats (today it’s immigrants for example).
So, it’s a simple math equation. Let’s say the corporations win 51% of the coin flips and the free market / law abiding public wins 49% of the time. For a very long time, it can stay more or less even. Cops versus robbers- the equilibrium stays intact.
But imagine a limit that goes to infinity. What happens? Eventually the interest of wealth wins. Now, different societies can have different coin flip ratios.
I think our society is nowhere near 51% / 49%. I think your solutions would bring us closer to that 50 / 50 but due to again, the very nature of the capitalist system- the law will never be in the driving seat.
Two very simple axioms determine that, which we have discussed above
wealth tends to accumu
Yeah, the most likely formulation is free market socialism, as in, lots of worker-owned co-ops, but goods are traded in a free market. Those co-ops need to be relatively small, to avoid any one org from having too much control.
Agreed. And cops. You tend to get what you pay for.
Sure, and the way to stop drugs from coming in is to make that trade unprofitable. Legalize drugs, and provide safe ways to use even the hardest drugs. If you do that, the few people who want it can get it in a safe way (i.e. trip out at your local pharmacy), and you don’t get all of the violence that comes with black market trade.
But no, “drugs bad,” and the public wants to control “bad” things. The government shouldn’t be deciding what is “good” or “bad,” but how to provide a desired service in a way that doesn’t hurt others. Ideally, we end up with open borders because criminals no longer have an incentive to relocate (at least more-so than regular immigrants).
True, and that’s going to be the case regardless of the system you choose. The bigger the potential profit, the more care needs to be taken in crafting and enforcing laws.
They don’t also own the railroads and whatnot. The issue w/ Standard Oil was the sheer amount of infrastructure they controlled, not that they were the biggest player in their market. As long as the profit motive is to produce goods at competitive rates, it’s not a problem that they’re raking in crazy profits. But once they get a monopoly, the incentive changes to killing competition so they can raise prices, which also gives them massive leverage against government (no more oil unless I get <concession>).
The way it seems to work like the typical boom/bust business cycle. In the stock market, we tend to get 7-10 years of boom, followed by 1-2 years of bust, and the cycle repeats. Likewise, we get a build-up of problems, and then we pass some key legislation or do a high-profile anti-trust breakup, and the system kind of resets.
The issue we’re left with is whether these corrections are sufficient, or if, like stock valuations, there’s an upward trend of giving corporations too much power. I worry there is, because we don’t seem willing to make the painful changes we need to get a deep enough correction (e.g. we should’ve let more banks fail in 2008, fix election process, etc).
I guess the main difference is that I think things are salvageable. However, we need to rethink the interaction between government and the market, and stop expecting government to solve all our problems. Government is a pretty big hammer, and we need to be very careful breaking it out since it can cause a lot of problems in a hurry.
To be honest, I think we are very ideologically aligned. I agree that government power is something that should be used with very precise care. Look at what happens for example when we introduce Pell Grants, giving lower income kids the opportunity to go to college.
That sounds great, right? Who doesn’t support that? Well, I sure want poor kids to be afforded the opportunity to go to school.
But look at what actually happens. Now you have a whole new class of people with a sizable chunk of government money. The demand for college goes up. Tuition rates skyrocket. The few thousand you get from the Pell Grant is now meaningless and it counter intuitively costs you more even with the grant.
Who benefits? Not the kids. Not the working class. The college administrators.
Kamala was campaigning “taxes incentives for first time homeowners!” Great. Who is going to say to no to that, right? Support young families. Sure.
What would inevitably happen? Large increase in spending => large increase in price. So if they get a $10,000 tax credit but the houses are $15,000 more expensive- what’s the difference? These are arbitrary numbers, obviously, and not borne out of some analysis.
But who would benefit? Not young families. Banks and land owners.
Government action, usually disguised as something to help is almost always going to be twisted to hurt average people.
But yes, I agree 100%. I rather like Chomsky’s take on this. I’m not an anarchist but he has advocated before for a system where every single use of government power should be consistently and continually challenged. Every single time the government spends a dollar, it needs to be transparent and justified and there needs to be a way to challenge it.
The thing is, government spending is not inherently a bad thing. Government action sometimes is exactly what is needed. For example in an economic crisis, government stimulus can be enough to turn things around or at least ameliorate the situation for the working class.
But and the big but - and the but that basically had made me lose all faith in democracy over the last 10 years or so is the way you put it
Politicians do not do what is rational. They do what is popular. These are two separate things entirely. And even worse, they can modify what is popular with a variety of mechanisms. For a simple example- look at the death tax. You ask average Americans whether they support a death tax, they will say of course not. It sounds absurd, right?
If you call it an inheritance tax, all of a sudden majority of people support it.
So yeah, I think you’re right in that we more or less align on what the ideal system should be but you still believe in the ideals of the Enlightenment and believe that egalitarianism and liberty is possible.
I think humanity is brutal and stupid by nature and we are bound to be ruled by people with strength. I think all government systems eventually deteriorate into fancy feudalism.
For a bit of an absurd statement- I think what we need to do is create a constitution that is very explicit. And then what we need to do is let an AI enforce it. Assuming the AI is objective and not able to be influenced, I think then and only then would we have a free society. And the irony is- we wouldn’t be in control of it.
Maybe I’m just a pessimist about human nature. Don’t misinterpret me, I consider myself a humanist. I like humans. I feel empathy for others. I want the best world possible for everyone.
But I think humans in a group are stupid. The crowd is like a locust swarm, destroying without thinking. It’s sad
Great write up, I appreciate the modeling.
I would only want actual state/local holidays anyway.
If I actually care about an event I am more than capable to set the event mysekf (e.g. Sysadmin day)
Cowardly sycophants giving their “divine” leader his wishes without question
Remove Google (Alphabet), Apple, Microsoft, Facebook (Meta), and Amazon from your life (and more, of course, but these are the big tech ones). Difficult but 100% necessary these days. De-Google your Android phone/tablet (basically Android without Google is possible), use Linux, order from small businesses, don’t use social media owned by big corporations, etc.
Got any recommendations? I looked into this but found only graphene or calyx as real contenders but it requires a pixel phone. Not that I’m absolutely am against pixel hardware but having to buy a new phone while I still have 3 or so years of software support on my current phone seems a bit silly: - /