Slashdot Mirror


Is Silicon Valley Morally Bankrupt and Toxic?

concealment sends this quote from a post about how the goals of many tech companies are at odds with what's good for consumers: "Since I've been out of the Silicon-Valley-centered tech industry, I've become increasingly convinced that it's morally bankrupt and essentially toxic to our society. Companies like Google and Facebook — in common with most public companies — have interests that are frequently in conflict with the well-being of — I was going to say their customers or their users, but I'll say 'people' in general, since it's wider than that. People who use their systems directly, people who don't — we're all affected by it, and although some of the outcomes are positive a disturbingly high number of them are negative: the erosion of privacy, of consumer rights, of the public domain and fair use, of meaningful connections between people and a sense of true community, of beauty and care taken in craftsmanship, of our very physical well-being. No amount of employee benefits or underfunded Google.org projects can counteract that. Over time, I've come to consider that this situation is irremediable, given our current capitalist system and all its inequalities. To fix it, we're going to need to work on social justice and rethinking how we live and work and relate to each other. Geek toys like self-driving cars and augmented reality sunglasses won't fix it. Social networks designed to identify you to corporations so they can sell you more stuff won't fix it. Better ad targeting or content matching algorithms definitely won't fix it."

19 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. For the umpteenth time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Betteridge's law of headlines
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states:

      "Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no". ...
    "The reason why journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably bollocks, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but still want to run it."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

    As for the article's content:

    A great discovery!
    The author has finally also found out that their customers are the advertising firms, their 'users' are the product they sell.
    Film at 11.

    The rest is some pseudo-socialist rant.

    Move along, nothing to see here.

    1. Re:For the umpteenth time... by i_ate_god · · Score: 5, Insightful

      er... positing a question on a discussion forum is a generally acceptable way of starting a discussion on said forum

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    2. Re:For the umpteenth time... by Nostromo21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why? He's an AC & an apathetic/cynical dimwit. Soulskill does well to remind us of our lost humanity & the soullessness our western society is headed towards, if not already there. Quoting bullshit wikipedia 'laws' at us also doesn't change the facts or change anything in actual fact.

      In any case, SV is just a reflection & extension of our society as a whole, just another symptom of what may be the beginning of the end, if we're not past the point of no return already..??? (who says every discussion post can't end with a ? ? :)

    3. Re:For the umpteenth time... by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With that out of the way, why do people neglect the power they have as consumers in the market?

      I have only one question for you: Do you feel powerful?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    4. Re:For the umpteenth time... by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's so wrong with socialism? Why is it always an insult?

      It's not like we ever had communism yet either. Every attempt at communism was just an elaborate tribute to Orwell's Animal Farm. It's not like capitalism is the clear winner, in terms of both economic and moral success.

      Both are deeply flawed implementations of their ideologies where corruption and greed have perverted the movement towards the original positive ideas of freedom and equality (equality in the sense of human worth and opportunity, not material distribution).

      It's so obvious to me that some aspects of society need to be to treated like critical infrastructure and all attempts must be made to remove corruption from it. Step one, is removing profit.

      I've lived long enough to realize that we don't even have capitalism. That's a farce. Any attempts and pleas to even move towards fairness, sanity, social justice, or basically towards the center of capitalism is perceived as far left socialism. Which again, as an insult makes no sense.

      Hmmm, what's that political term about windows? Oh yeah, Overton.

    5. Re:For the umpteenth time... by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is quite refreshing and thought-provoking to read such a comment on Slashot, of all places. I tend to wholeheartedly concur with girlintraining. My European vantage point must have something to do with that. No industry, when growing beyond a certain size, can go without regulation for a long time and still be governed by something that looks and smells like "ethics". The role of the state is NOT only to protect the weak - it is, also, a role to reign in the strong. We have known that since the Romans, more specifically since the attempts of more than one emperor to regulate the worst excesses in Roman economy ( Diocletian, most of all ). To ignore this is to deliberately let the lions' cage open, backstage in a circus full on unsuspecting public.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  2. If other people want what you want by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    then it will happen. Companies that survive do so by providing something that people want and something that people will pay for (sometimes the two are split, like Facebook).

    If other people don't want what you want, accept it, and don't blame Silicon Valley.

    1. Re:If other people want what you want by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He isn't wrong though.

      People are not looking at the bigger picture when they make their purchasing decisions for several reasons:

      1) They don't understand what cyberspace *is* yet, how their actions, and others actions, can have real tangible effects on their "real" lives.
      2) They have a poor understanding of privacy, anonymity, it's true value to all parties, and Game Theory.
      3) Apathy. I'm too small to make any meaningful difference anyways, so I will just continue to act against my best interests in the long term for short term gains in transient happiness and feelings of security.
      4) I'm too poor to shop at someplace else other than Walmart. I have to save my pennies, regardless of the fact that continuing to give money to businesses that outsource jobs, has real and tragic effects on all people back at home, which ultimately affects how many pennies I get paid in the first place.
      5) It really is a pretty shiny....
      6) Huh? Watevs. I don't like peeps that use like big words and shit always thinking there better or something. I got swag, yolo muthafucka

      The death of America, and Freedom, will be because of apathy and complacency. I've a hard time really blaming them either, since there is an awful lot to be cynical about. Only until this generation actually has to suffer, really suffer, for Freedom will they finally understand, revolt against our oppressors (peacefully I hope) and then allow future generations to make all the same mistakes all over again.

  3. Dude. It's your fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You were the one who wanted all this great content for free (as in beer). By "you", I mean the opinions expressed here on Slashdot, especially when the topic comes to copyrights and file sharing laws. Google and Facebook are doing things "the right way", by that reckoning, but yes there is the darker side of which you speak.

    How is Google supposed to pay 30,000 engineers, 1M rack-mounted x86 systems, and still hit their quarterly earnings and revenue targets? And the same for Facebook.

    Only Amazon has a traditional business model, but even they are leaders in mining content about their users as well as their traditional IP inventory.

  4. As someone who lives in the NYC tri-state... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me tell you, if you want to see toxic check out Wall St. and it's satellites in NJ and CT. At least Silicon Valley creates cool shit that make people productive and/or entertained. Wall Street produces nothing, it just sucks value out of the economy and puts it in overseas tax shelters. it sounds to me like you're burned out from living in the center of a capitalist vortex. Take some time off and go live in Massachusetts or Oregon or something and decompress. I would kill to work at a place like Apple. I don't care if it means 90 hour weeks, you got something more important to do than develop the next generation of computing technology?

    1. Re:As someone who lives in the NYC tri-state... by ygtai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Eh.. if you work at Apple, you get to develop the next generation of marketing technology...

  5. Nothing is broken except how you see things by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Gee, I'd love to see a world where Intel, Dell, IBM, HP, TI and a host of other companies never existed. Yea, we'd be better off without GE, Ford, General Motors, Exxon and the like. Would not need any hackers in Silicon Valley, much less silicon. Just forget the transistor, integrated circuits or microprocessors ever existed.

    Capitalism may have it's flaws, but it is better than any previously tried system over the last 6,000 years of recorded history. Please let's not repeat any of them!

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  6. Social Responsiblity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The era of socialism as it defined in the dictionary is dead in America. The idea of noblesse oblige, and societal responsibility are not only forgotten in minds of those who control the wealth in this country, but spit upon as if it were a curse. Too many Americans today feel that wealth redistribution by the state should be abolished, as they are quick to scapegoat the needy in light of this country's ills. It is this undercurrent of disregard for our fellow countrymen that is showing all over the place in the attitudes of the Haves, in today's politics and even something so basic as getting a job.

    America needs to wake the hell up and realise that helping each other, taking responsibility for one's actions, and working for the common good are the cornerstones of civilization. Throw them out, and all you will have is barbarity and all that implies.

    1. Re:Social Responsiblity by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nyet. What I'm objecting to is the GGP up there saying that government-run wealth redistribution isn't done at the point of a gun. It's just fairy-tale nonsense.

      It's only fairy-tale nonsense if you fail to realise that wealth-maintenance is also done at the point of a gun. It is only possible to be wealthy because society enforces your property rights at the point of a gun. If you want to be reductionist, every social interaction is at the point of a gun because if you stray too far from accepted behaviour then either society collectively or an individual will shoot you. That's a pointless and irrelevant argument and it's just as pointless in this situation.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. If the Silicon Valley is toxic ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... well ...

    Please stop using the PC / Tablets / Smartphones - for many of the hardware were designed in Silicon Valley

    Please stop using many of the software that you are using - including technologies that enable you to surf the Net

    Without the Silicon Valley - and many of its offspring around the world - the author of TFA can whine all he wants, on a column on his local newspaper - if the editor of his local newspaper grant him a column, that is

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  8. Re:Stopping road deaths is a "geek toy"? by VAElynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never shall I sit my arse in a self-driving car. Bus? Fine, that's what I tend to prefer being a shitty driver. But not something that can be messed with as easily as these sort of control systems.
    Someone wise said this on slashdot earlier to the topic - Society can cope with serial killers, but parallel ones are a different cup of coffee entirely. Imagine the result of a software flaw or a malicious intervention where twenty cars do the same fucking stupid thing on an interstate highway. Sure, people fuck up all the time, but at least there, the probabilities of them doing so are fairly independant, and they can adapt to a messup better than software.

  9. Re:Nothing is broken except how you see things by AdamWill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you read the article, it's not about that at all. It's about _new_ Silicon Valley: the startup culture. This is massively different to the culture that existed when Intel, Dell, IBM, HP and TI were founded.

    Those companies are all fairly traditional companies in organization and goals. They were typical old-school American corporate structures built to achieve modern results. HP wasn't crowdfunded, hyped into a bubble and then pushed into an IPO to make the founders and a couple of venture capitalists into multi-millionaires. It was a long-term endeavour built around providing serious engineering for serious ends. It wasn't a get-rich-quick scheme.

    This article is more about the culture of quick-hit startups in Silicon Valley these days, which are built more around buzz, hype and marketing vapidity than they are around serious engineering or any kind of long-term planning. It's questioning the culture of founding a company around a cute idea with the aim of selling out in two years to become a millionaire. That is not what Hewlett and Packard were about. They built a company around engineering on the basis of a belief that they could provide a benefit over the long term.

    If anything I'd say the weakness of the article lies in its evidence, which isn't really sufficient. It has one useful and accurate case study - Uber - but it really needs more than that to talk about any kind of trend. I rather think, though, that if the author had tried, he could have come up with lots of other examples. Uber was a great case study, though. It's 'innovative' and 'disruptive'...where you read 'disruptive' to mean 'doesn't see the point in complying with regulations meant to ensure public safety'. There's a _reason_ taxi services are strongly licensed and regulated virtually the world over (and you probably wouldn't feel great taking a cab in a place where they aren't).

  10. Re:Huh? by Elbereth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would help if we actually had a left wing. Currently, we've got a center-right and far-right wing. I'm admittedly on the far-left, making me a bit out of step with the rest of the country, but it's deeply frustrating to any socialist when people call Barack Obama, a center-right politician, a Marxist or socialist.

    Obama is very friendly to Wall Street. Very, very friendly.

  11. Re:Obligatory by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google+ doesn't want me to use a handle. I'm a queer/transgender female so that's offensive.

    You obviously read enough of The Fucking Article to have seen this part:

    As a queer/genderqueer woman, victim of abuse, and someone who was (at that very time) experiencing online harassment and bullying, I was very vocal within Google for the need for Google+ to support pseudonymity.

    Her words speak for themselves.
    You haven't done anyone a service by summarizing.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!