Ethics/integrity and freedoms

HTML5!

It's seems nobody really cares about the above anymore. As long as people are feeding their need for superficial social interactions.

I read something yesterday whereby Facebook have banned an application similar to Instagram from posting photos to Facebook.

Now, I don't have a FB account myself, but I do use Instagram, but these kinds of tactics simply don't sit well with me so I won't be using it again.

I know the app is competition to instagram, but banning it just seems slightly underhand. It doesn't make the issue go away.

I know if you were to delve into most companies practices you'll find something you don't like - Apple suing everyone from small startups to granny smith - but when it comes to stifling young business and threatening with law suits I just think it's a step too far.

Here's a good interview with Richard Stallman (it's 11mins long but a quick Google will tell you what he's all about. Also the title is a bit misleading):

So AH, is integrity important to you when it comes to things like this? If so, what don't you use and why?

Linux FTW!

monkeypants

Are you saying that Facebook is a right?

HTML5!

monkeypants wrote: »

Are you saying that Facebook is a right?

No...

Duggys Housemate

Stallman would have us all working in starbucks, and writing code for free. Meanwhile dentistry would still cost. Its slavery masquerading as freedom.

smash

monkeypants wrote: »

Are you saying that Facebook is a right?

I think he's saying he wont use instagram again, because of something that facebook did which in no way affects him because he doesn't have a facebook account anyway.

Drakares

HTML5! wrote: »

Now, I don't have a FB account myself, but I do use Instagram, but these kinds of tactics simply don't sit well with me so I won't be using it again.

I'm sure Zuckerberg and the lads in the Facebook HQ are losing sleep.

HTML5!

smash wrote: »

I think he's saying he wont use instagram again, because of something that facebook did which in no way affects him because he doesn't have a facebook account anyway.

And it's about ethics and integrity, which seem to be in short supply around here.

HTML5!

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Stallman would have us all working in starbucks, and writing code for free. Meanwhile dentistry would still cost. Its slavery masquerading as freedom.

You can write a code distribute it and you could write a version of your distributed code, 'copyleft' what's in that and use it as a source of income.

HTML5!

Drakares wrote: »

I'm sure Zuckerberg and the lads in the Facebook HQ are losing sleep.

Yeah because I'm trying to stick it to them by not using it. :rolleyes:

The clue is in the thread title.

shoos

Businesses exist in order to make money, that's their priority and explains why you have Facebook and Apple behaving the way they do. It's not up to businesses to behave integrally, there is literally no reason for them to do so unless it somehow relates back to their profits.

To assume otherwise is a little naive.

HTML5!

shoos wrote: »

Businesses exist in order to make money, that's their priority and explains why you have Facebook and Apple behaving the way they do. It's not up to businesses to behave integrally, there is literally no reason for them to do so unless it somehow relates back to their profits.

To assume otherwise is a little naive.

True. And it's up to a person to decide whether or not to support such businesses as it is mine.

I think, rather than outright banning that app (which does seem unfair to the small guys trying to fulfill their ambition), FB should allow it - competition breeds innovation.

Chips Lovell

How on earth is Facebook a "freedom"?

shoos

HTML5! wrote: »

True. And it's up to a person to decide whether or not to support such businesses as it is mine.

I think, rather than outright banning that app (which does seem unfair to the small guys trying to fulfill their ambition), FB should allow it - competition breeds innovation.

It's a nice idea, but that kind of thinking within corporations just doesn't exist. Their focus is to eliminate competition in whatever way possible, and it's up to the law to set guidelines on what is or isn't acceptable - hence anti-trust law.

Individual decisions on who to give your money to is the best way around it, if you don't agree with a company's practices then by all means don't support them. But you also have to bear Greenwashing in mind. Companies can tell you all kinds of **** about how great they are, and what they're doing for children in poverty etc. etc. but it is purely in order to build profits. Very difficult to live in society today and consume 100% ethically.

TheIrishGrover

HTML5! wrote: »

Yeah because I'm trying to stick it to them by not using it. :rolleyes:

The clue is in the thread title.

So you stick to Instagram on your iPhone like a good hipster 'cos, y'know, Apple is a VERY ethical company.........

Where To

I boycott boycotts.

TheIrishGrover

Where To wrote: »

I boycott boycotts.

YEAH!!!!! Stick it to the lowercase-M man!!!!!!!!!!
:pac:

Ush1

HTML5! wrote: »

True. And it's up to a person to decide whether or not to support such businesses as it is mine.

I think, rather than outright banning that app (which does seem unfair to the small guys trying to fulfill their ambition), FB should allow it - competition breeds innovation.

Instagram aren't small guys, why should Facebook help a competitor in any way?

HTML5!

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

How on earth is Facebook a "freedom"?

That's not what I'm saying. At all.

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

So you stick to Instagram on your iPhone like a good hipster 'cos, y'know, Apple is a VERY ethical company.........

I bet you'd love to think about me, but you're wrong.

Ush1 wrote: »

Instagram aren't small guys, why should Facebook help a competitor in any way?

I give up.

Chips Lovell

HTML5! wrote: »

That's not what I'm saying. At all.

Well you're the one who entitled this "ethics/integrity and freedom"

Facebook's a private company, not some sort of public service. If you don't like their service you go elsewhere, which you're doing. But ethics and freedom don't really come into it.

DrumSteve

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

How on earth is Facebook a "freedom"?

I know but if you dont share that before the 5th of March, Facebook will start to charge you!

DrumSteve

TheIrishGrover wrote: »

So you stick to Instagram on your iPhone like a good hipster 'cos, y'know, Apple is a VERY ethical company.........

Im sure their highly overpaid asian workforce would agree with you if they were allowed.

Duggys Housemate

HTML5! wrote: »

You can write a code distribute it and you could write a version of your distributed code, 'copyleft' what's in that and use it as a source of income.

No idea what "copy left" means. no, I like getting paid by people with money.

Duggys Housemate

DrumSteve wrote: »

Im sure their highly overpaid asian workforce would agree with you if they were allowed.

Is this crap still believed? Apple have no direct employees in Asia. They outsource assembly to Foxconn who, by and large, assemble all phones on the market. All pcs on the market. And most electronic goods.

Except the cheaper China based Android stuff which is assembled by small sweat shops. Foxconn pays above average wages in China.

awec

Stallman is a goon. A parody.

DrumSteve

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Is this crap still believed? Apple have no direct employees in Asia. They outsource assembly to Foxconn who, by and large, assemble all phones on the market. All pcs on the market. And most electronic goods.

Except the cheaper China based Android stuff which is assembled by small sweat shops. Foxconn pays above average wages in China.

So because they outsource they are not in any way responsible for the pay and conditions of the staff there?

TheIrishGrover

"It wasn't me officer. I'm innocent! On the other hand, the people I employ....."

Duggys Housemate

DrumSteve wrote: »

So because they outsource they are not in any way responsible for the pay and conditions of the staff there?

Who said that?

They do in fact do plenty of reports on the conditions unlike the cheap android or Windows machine you no doubt use.

I was responding to false facts (Apple has employees in China) and to the pseudo concern by group thinkers about said employees, posted from their HTC.

orestes

shoos wrote: »

It's a nice idea, but that kind of thinking within corporations just doesn't exist. Their focus is to eliminate competition in whatever way possible, and it's up to the law to set guidelines on what is or isn't acceptable - hence anti-trust law.

Individual decisions on who to give your money to is the best way around it, if you don't agree with a company's practices then by all means don't support them. But you also have to bear Greenwashing in mind. Companies can tell you all kinds of **** about how great they are, and what they're doing for children in poverty etc. etc. but it is purely in order to build profits. Very difficult to live in society today and consume 100% ethically.

One step further is that any company that does anything that is not solely directed towards making profit in some way is acting unethically since the sole purpose of the company is to make money for the owners, doing anything that isn't directed towards that goal is technically stealing from the owners of the company since you are costing them money.

sock puppet

To be fair, if Microsoft were to somehow ensure that internet explorer was the only browser you could possibly use on a Windows computer I imagine most people here would go apeshit

Scruffles

sock puppet wrote: »

To be fair, if Microsoft were to somehow ensure that internet explorer was the only browser you could possibly use on a Windows computer I imagine most people here would go apeshit

it indirectly used to be that way-most service/business websites were refusing to load any content whatsoever with a message about gecko rendering not supported,internet explorer required.
still refused to use it back then-but had to use something with trident rendering to view argos,comet et al so ended up using the old/original version of sleipnir;a japanese browser.

anyway,as for instagram,there is a firefox addon for it-
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/instagram-for-firefox/?src=cb-dl-hotness
its view only at the moment but they are working on a fully interactive version.

KyussBishop

The OP makes a good point, though maybe it's one that is a little hard to articulate well; my own take on it would be this:
It's definitely true that there is a general lack of interest or understanding of ethical issues when it comes to corporations, politics, economics, etc., and while there isn't anything wrong with this on an individual level (it's fair enough if someone just isn't interested in something), it is a problematic thing on a wider societal level, because, as the OP hints at, when such attitudes are dominant, people tend not to care a whole lot about others or events, outside of their main social circle.

A large part of that is, in my view, compounded by the fact that a lot of people, probably most I'd say, just don't have very good critical thinking abilities; they might be pretty smart people in general, but not everyone is able to see through fallacious/deceptive/garbage/bullshít arguments, when they hear them (and may be averse to calling them out, when they do recognize them, for fear of social repercussions), and that's a pretty big problem societally.


For instance, there are a whole raft of arguments/attitudes that exist for basically promoting apathy, which are prevalent in society:
"Shure we're not starving in Africa, so we have things pretty good, we don't need to change anything"
"Nothing we do will ever change anything, so there's no point trying"
"I'm fine, so things aren't really that bad"
"I don't know of any alternatives, therefore there are no alternatives and people should stop complaining"
"People who protest/complain are all dolescum/self-interested/hypocrites"
"Politics/economics are boring, and people who talk about them are being boring/rude"
"Corrupt/unethical practice 'x' happens all the time, therefore it is normal, or there is nothing wrong with it, or nothing can be done about it"
"Unethical practice 'x' is not illegal, therefore there is nothing wrong with it"

All of these arguments are pretty much bullshít, but some of them are pretty prevalent attitudes in society, which persist in part due to apathy, and in part due to lack of critical thinking abilities for many people (and for some, due to a "fúck everyone else, I only care about me" attitude).

In general, I think people would care more about ethical/integrity issues all throughout society (from politics/economics to business and more), if they learned and exercised a minimal amount of critical thinking, instead of falling back (consciously or not) to many of the above flimsy excuses/justifications for apathy.

So yea, if people weren't able to honestly hold on to such flawed arguments for justifying apathy, I think there'd be a lot less apathy.

smash

sock puppet wrote: »

To be fair, if Microsoft were to somehow ensure that internet explorer was the only browser you could possibly use on a Windows computer I imagine most people here would go apeshit

Windows in an OS you purchase in order to install and use applications, Facebook is a free website. They can do what the want.