If anyone with principles quit the moment a company did something bad, you'd be left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

Sure, everyone probably has their own personal line such as "will quit if my employer is declared complicit in genocide by the UN", but bad customer service seems firmly in the "better to stay and advocate doing better from the inside" category

> and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

I don't see anything wrong with this. My integrity and values are above any company's. Companies can go to hell for all I care

You seem to believe that if people quit the company would fail. This is almost assuredly not the case. Instead you would have an equally powerful company with no moral compass whatsoever.

Quitting is a high cost option that denies you any future voice or ability to influence. Jumping straight to that over $200 is unlikely to be an effective tactic.

I am deeply sympathetic with the OP here and believe a refund should absolutely be granted, but if I heard of someone quitting their job in protest over not issuing a $200 refund my initial thought would be "they're an extremist and I should be skeptical of what they say".

I've worked with and known people who have no levels between zero and full meltdown. They're exhausting and I spend as little time around them as possible.

> Instead you would have an equally powerful company with no moral compass whatsoever.

given the information we have, this describes the current state.

This is a horrendously bad-faith take. You know full well it’s *not* just a one-off $200 issue: they treat customers like this at scale.

Don’t pretend this is an isolated matter, or that CS/billing is the only arena where Anthropic has such systemic issues.

I don’t know you, but your response honestly reads like it’s coming from someone wrestling with their own moral compromises. If so, please take a good hard look in the mirror. (E: yep — https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47953576)

> bad customer service seems firmly in the "better to stay and advocate doing better from the inside" category

How about Anthropic agreeing to a $1.5 billion settlement for perhaps the biggest theft in history?

Weird how people forgot about that.

> left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

So basically all of big tech.

Not in the slightest. There is robust discourse and vocal objection to bad actions at companies such as Microsoft (I used to work there) and Alphabet (currently do). It may not always change the course, but it has absolutely played into decision-making, changed whether features launch or what they look like, etc.

> there would be no hope of the company ever improving.

if they can't do anything about it now, what makes you think that situation will change in the future? if remedial action would be punished by those higher on the ladder, it certainly won't be promoted by those folks, leaving this hypothetical employee in exactly the same position they're currently in.

quit.

So far we have an Anthropic bug and what seems like an AI-generated "no refund" response that is hours old, not days or weeks. We have no official corporate comms backing this up, we have no real insight into any internal escalation. If your reaction is to quit before you even have any context on what's happening, your employer would probably be better off if you did quit.

By your own admission in other comments you work for exactly the type of company that optimizes for amoral hires -- Google, Facebook, etc. Based on their actions, Google, Facebook, et al, do seem amoral.

An IC won't be able to steer a ship like that back to morality. Whole teams can't do it. People at Google organized to stop this sort of shit and were fired IIRC?

Large institutions provide cover for bad actions by people who, without said cover, would not take those actions.

Therefore, I believe that "we'd be left with only people who are cynical and/or bad and/or sufficiently indentured to be unable to push back against management, and there would be no hope of the company ever improving" is the status quo.

So what are you even saying??

But they're not advocating. They're claiming they can do nothing. Quitting in protest would be more advocation.

Who says they're not advocating? Who says they were aware of this before today?

Extend this to other disciplines - if everyone who cared about security resigned every time leadership pushed to rush something out without proper testing, the world would be a worse place. Sticking around and continuing to try to change the culture is how good companies are made.

> Sticking around and continuing to try to change the culture is how good companies are made.

That’s not even a little bit true.

Companies going out of business or getting sidelined by competition is how good companies are made.

> Who says they're not advocating?

They did.

> I don't like it, but can't do much about it.

They're out of ideas. Quitting is an idea. There are plenty of other things to do but if they're not going to bother, then quitting in protest is better than going along, no?

Imagine quitting because some people are whining on HN. This forum has lost the plot.