Activist shareholders can claim whatever they want, at the end of the day it's just noise, founders control the company completely.

So "if I don't steal it someone else will"? I'd rate that as evil.

Maybe it's more like "If I don't do this job, someone else will"...

This is the big issue that came along when stable households (mom/dad taking care of you) were replaced by fentanyl and TikTok.

Moral character is something that has to be taught, it doesn't just come out on its own.

If your parents don't do it properly, you'll be just another cog in the soulless machine to which human life is of no value.

bingo. taught and reinforced with consequences.

The real issue is that corporate incentives don't prioritize morality

Corporations are run by people, who are not amoral.

People may not be amoral, but corporate structures often incentivize behavior that prioritizes profit over morality

Then let them do it. You don't do what you consider immoral.

If you want to take it so far off topic, then sure, go ahead with it.

I think the poster is applying your statement about leaving money on the table. Structural requirements to not leave money on the table is a Moloch results that leads to the deterioration of the system into being just stealing as much shit as possible.

I don't buy that argument. There are things Google does better than competitors, so them doing an evil thing means they are doing it better. Also, they could be spending those resources on something less evil.

Remember when the other AI companies wanted ClosedAI to stop "for humanity's sake" when all it meant was for them the catch up? None of these companies are "good". They all know that as soon as one company does it, they all must follow, so why not lead?

Ah yeah. Everybody else is doing it, so it must be okay to do. Fuck everything about this.

> Google does better than competitors

You need to try another search engine. Years ago...

This is what the parent comment _means_ IMO.

What are you are saying is: optimising for commercial success is incompatible with morality. The conclusion is that publicly traded megacorps must inevitably trend towards amorality.

So yes, they aren't "evil" but I think amorality is the closest thing to "evil" that actually exists in the real world.