Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

    Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men, for the nastiest of reasons, will somehow work for the benefit of us all.
    -- John Maynard Keynes.
I think he's onto something as I see the lengths Boing, Intel, FAANG, et. al going to benefit us all everyday...



Well they did overall, throughout their entire existence, didn't they?


There are so few corporations which build things to better the world and make money in the process.

99% of the corporations build things to earn money. Their wares sometimes do no harm, but it's the exception.

In many cases, the desire for money, not the need, is the driving force behind the technology. See n startups which are discussed here and categorized as "this is better as X. they're just trying to earn money with no real benefit to anyone".

Did Exxon hide their global warming research to benefit humanity? Of course not. Did Tetra Ethyl Lead added to gasoline instead of Ethanol, just because it was better? No because it was patentable and ethanol was not. Did WV created "better" diesel engines to benefit the humanity? No the engines were only "better" for their bottom line and problematic for every one. Did DuPont hid the effects of forever chemicals because it was beneficial/harmless to the nature? On the contrary.

Companies do whatever they can without breaking laws (or bending them with money) to earn more money. The products we get are side effects of it.

I like this take about current (Generative) AI hype:

    The true purpose of AI is to allow wealth to access skill without allowing skill to access wealth.
    -- jeffowski (at Twitter/X)


> Their wares sometimes do no harm, but it's the exception.

I disagree with that to a very extreme degree (also it's a very silly thing to say unless you don't see any value in computers, smartphones, planes, automobiles, washing machines, fridges and other appliances).

The things you listed are generally the exceptions. Also the question is whether society/people benefited from VW, Exxon, DuPont etc. to such an extent that it outweighed all of those things?

Of course it's relative, if we value access to cheap and effective transportation, synthetic clothing, various plastic products etc. more than we care about all the negative externalities that's what we get... It's all down to incentives, corporations are inherently neither good nor evil.

> to earn more money. The products we get are side effects of it.

I agree that's true on the whole. But that's why humans do anything at all (replace money with other tangible or intangible benefits). Absolute altruism doesn't scale and isn't in any way sustainable.


They did when they were led by people passionate about the technology. As soon as MBAs got ahold of them, it was all about enriching shareholders in the short-term.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: