Predatory Behavior Runs Rampant in Facebook’s Addiction Support Groups

Re:Predatory Behavior Runs Rampant in Facebook’s Addiction S... by carapace on Monday May 21, 2018 @02:02PM (#17120363)

> Wouldn't the corollary of Friedman's position be that if businesses take actions that people in society find offensive (such as preying on vulnerable individuals), that those people should therefore work to change the law?

I've had exactly that said to me in a discussion of pollution: I.e. someone actually said that corporations should pollute to make more profit to the legally allowed extent of the law, to maximize shareholder value, and then they can pass laws to reduce the legally allowed pollution levels, rather than just instructing management to not pollute.

(My reply involved VW emissions scandal FWIW.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Predatory Behavior Runs Rampant in Facebook’s Addiction S... by Maybestring on Monday May 21, 2018 @03:00PM (#17120821)

That argument assumes a dividing line between business and influence on lawmaking that doesn't exist.

If Corp A is reaping the profit while the cost is diffused then Corp A is in a far better place to influence future laws than those they are harming.

And by the same guiding principals, Corp A should influence the law to the extent allowable by law, including changes which allow them more legal influence, and remove the influence of others.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Predatory Behavior Runs Rampant in Facebook’s Addiction S... by carapace on Tuesday May 22, 2018 @12:45AM (#17123782)

Oh yeah, I know. I took it as yet another example of how ideology or dogma degrades reasoning ability.

The purity and simplicity of the "Friedman position" is seductive. But I just don't think it is fundamentally valid to e.g. pollute to make money just because you're acting on behalf of someone else.

[ Parent | on HN ]