Great read
this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
566 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
59534 readers
3135 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This story, like most corporate stories these days, frustrates me.
This is a tale as old as time...the time when American corporations went to shit as our elected officials ensured there was no liability and realistic legal consequences to executes or MBA decision making.
I'm not a business scholar obviously. I've always been led to believe that in order for the world to turn and air to be breathable, corporations and businesses need liability protection for those who run it. Why?
If I kill someone with my car, even if it was completely an accident, I'm still liable right? Should I account for the death of that person, child, etc?
How would things not be better if, instead of the bottom line and stock price being the ultimate concern of CEOs, it was them not going to court to face charges because they allowed their company to kill people with its negligence? I know there's some nuance here, but ultimately, I feel like everything sucks because there's no incentive to care about anything but investors and greed.
If industry, aerospace or other, was run by people who cared about not killing people and going to jail, would they in turn ensure their design and production met the quality and ambition of the type of people here, discussing their accounts of cutting corners or experienced personnel just to save money?