Limited Pressing

[YosemiteSam]

Wow. If you have a Facebook account, you may want to go check out Limited Pressing's Facebook page. They have some choice words to say about their dealings with Facebook. I would like directly to the page, but as I said. There are some *choice* words used. (not many, but 1 is too much to post here)

Facebook is almost as evil as Apple it seems. Not that that was any hidden secret.

 

[vta]

Sam brother, If it's a crusade you're on, you're going to have to forfeit everything you own just about. The world is evil. Business is evil; the heart of advertising is pure evil. The bottom line, highest ceiling, greatest concern of each and every company that creates, sells, steals a product and convinces you to buy it is to generate money. Your money, from your pocket to their coffers.

If they sell themselves as being wholesome and honest or clinical and simply acting as a provider of commodity, it's because a team of analysts alerted them to the people that don't like 'evil' companies and they shifted their marketing strategy for that demographic. They're based on taking advantage of what the end user does not know, misrepresentation of actual necessity, usury and just flat out inequality.

Apple. Google. Facebook. T-Mobile. Verizon. AT&T. Acura. Honda. Chevrolet. BMW, Budweiser. Coors. Cialis. Viagra. etc, ad nauseaum.

None of them want a better you, a better experience for you. Just an addicted you, that will return again and again and tithe to their company on a monthly basis.

Not that I don't agree with you, and that is an interesting an thought provoking note by Limited Pressing. But never the less, if it's evil in business you don't like. there's really only one way to marginalize it. Stop buying **** you don't need.

 

[Doomsday101]

Sam brother, If it's a crusade you're on, you're going to have to forfeit everything you own just about. The world is evil. Business is evil; the heart of advertising is pure evil. The bottom line, highest ceiling, greatest concern of each and every company that creates, sells, steals a product and convinces you to buy it is to generate money. Your money, form your pocket to their coffers.

If they sell themselves as being wholesome and honest or clinical and simply acting as a provider of commodity, it's because a team of analysts alerted them to the people that don't like 'evil' companies and they shifted their marketing strategy for that demographic. They're based on taking advantage of what the end user does not know, misrepresentation of actual necessity, usury and just flat out inequality.

Apple. Google. Facebook. T-Mobile. Verizon. AT&T. Acura. Honda. Chevrolet. BMW, Budweiser. Coors. Cialis. Viagra. etc, ad nauseaum.

None of them want a better you, a better experience for you. Just an addicted you, that will return again and again and tithe to their company on a monthly basis.

Not that I don't agree with you, and that is an interesting an thought provoking note by Limited Pressing. But never the less, if it's evil in business you don't like. there's really only one way to marginalize it. Stop buying **** you don't need.

I don't know I don't consider them evil, they sell a product people want if that is a sin then don't buy or use their product. Are they about making money? you bet they are as any business would be.

 

[vta]

I don't know I don't consider them evil, they sell a product people want if that is a sin then don't buy or use their product. Are they about making money? you bet they are as any business would be.

Business of it's own accord is not evil, it's the ways that it is conducted.

 

[vta]

Funny I was thinking this just the other day. In the day's when sports revenues were nothing like they are now, even if adjusted for inflation, they were essentially free to watch on television. I watched Ali for free. Eventually I was expected to pay for Mike Tyson's 90 second fights.

Now that advertising and network deals have given them copious amounts of wealth, you basically have to pay for it. Sure NBC, FOX and CBS - the rabbit-ear channels, still carry games, but who is using rabbit ear, so you are still paying, and it's shift was very slow. Almost unnoticeable. Direct TV. NFL Network, ESPN are all based on a payer service and eventually it'll all shift to a payer system entirely. Whether it's sold on 'satellite technology' or whatever.

Whether or not people want it, it's taking advantage of it unnecessarily in the name of greed. I don't watch, and it's my right not to and yours to watch. But it is still what it is.

 

[Stash]

Business of it's own accord is not evil, it's the ways that it is conducted.

I absolutely agree with you here.

Business in and of itself is not 'evil', it's what people do under the guise of business that is.

The chase for money makes some people do some terrible things.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Business of it's own accord is not evil, it's the ways that it is conducted.

It's called Business Ethics and they teach it in college. Some companies follow it strictly, some have *some* ethics, some don't have any. Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Facebook don't have any ethics at all.

Google used to fly the "Do no Evil" mantra, but they too have started straying and that is disappointing. Though, they haven't sunk to the level of the four companies I just named.

 

[vta]

I absolutely agree with you here.

Business in and of itself is not 'evil', it's what people do under the guise of business that is.

The chase for money makes some people do some terrible things.

Amen.

It's called Business Ethics and they teach it in college. Some companies follow it strictly, some have *some* ethics, some don't have any. Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Facebook don't have any ethics at all.

Google used to fly the "Do no Evil" mantra, but they too have started straying and that is disappointing. Though, they haven't sunk to the level of the four companies I just named.

:laugh2: And what other business courses do they teach and how many of their practices contradict business ethics? The bottom line is money and gratuitous ethics are in play merely to quell the torch bearing mobs. Like I said, I agree with you, I just think it's sort f runaway and infesting more companies than most are willing to admit.

 

[Reality]

It's called Business Ethics and they teach it in college. Some companies follow it strictly, some have *some* ethics, some don't have any. Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Facebook don't have any ethics at all.

Google used to fly the "Do no Evil" mantra, but they too have started straying and that is disappointing. Though, they haven't sunk to the level of the four companies I just named.

It's like when good people go into politics. They start out thinking they will change the world and bring honor and respect to their position, only to realize that the world doesn't operate that way. I think that's Google's problem. They truly believed in "do no evil", but over time, they realized that few other companies follow that mantra and I believe it became less important to them.

When I see Google, I see a company that struggles to adhere to its own noble beliefs. It desperately wants to be the ally to users, but it also wants to outshine its competitors that you listed above. It's almost like they do something somewhat considered "evil" and then try to do several user-first actions to compensate as penance for it.

#reality

 

[Stash]

Amen.



:laugh2: And what other business courses do they teach and how many of their practices contradict business ethics? The bottom line is money and gratuitous ethics are in play merely to quell the torch bearing mobs. Like I said, I agree with you, I just think it's sort f runaway and infesting more companies than most are willing to admit.

And undermining our country's financial stability as a result.

Anyone ever play the game Jenga? If so, you'll know what I'm talking about.

 

[vta]

And undermining our country's financial stability as a result.

Anyone ever play the game Jenga? If so, you'll know what I'm talking about.

The system is only as good as the people running it.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Companies with bad ethics generally get themselves in trouble when other companies or customers decide to stop dealing with them.

Now, companies like Microsoft and Oracle basically had monopolies of sort that locked their customers in.

While Apple is big, it's not too big to reap the repercussions of their unethical actions. Apple does not hold a monopoly and they are also playing a serious game of Russian Roulette in the legal system that is probably going to cause more self-inflicted harm than good for them.

Do you realize that Apple is suing Samsung trying to ruin Samsung's business, yet it's Samsung that is one of Apple's biggest parts suppliers for their products? Talking about ****ing where you eat.

 

[Stash]

The system is only as good as the people running it.

And many of those people will lie even to themselves in the pursuit of money.

My hope is that we'll soon figure out that you can ethically make money in this world and that it will benefit you in the long run to do so.

My fear is that we'll have to learn that lesson the hard way as a result of economic collapse.

 

[Stash]

Companies with bad ethics generally get themselves in trouble when other companies or customers decide to stop dealing with them.

Now, companies like Microsoft and Oracle basically had monopolies of sort that locked their customers in.

While Apple is big, it's not too big to reap the repercussions of their unethical actions. Apple does not hold a monopoly and they are also playing a serious game of Russian Roulette in the legal system that is probably going to cause more self-inflicted harm than good for them.

Do you realize that Apple is suing Samsung trying to ruin Samsung's business, yet it's Samsung that is one of Apple's biggest parts suppliers for their products? Talking about ****ing where you eat.

It would help if the consumer did more homework and put more thought into who they're giving their money to.

It's not just companies acting in unethical ways, it's the 'mindless consumer' forking over their dollars without asking 'why' as well.

 

[vta]

Companies with bad ethics generally get themselves in trouble when other companies or customers decide to stop dealing with them.

Now, companies like Microsoft and Oracle basically had monopolies of sort that locked their customers in.

While Apple is big, it's not too big to reap the repercussions of their unethical actions. Apple does not hold a monopoly and they are also playing a serious game of Russian Roulette in the legal system that is probably going to cause more self-inflicted harm than good for them.

Do you realize that Apple is suing Samsung trying to ruin Samsung's business, yet it's Samsung that is one of Apple's biggest parts suppliers for their products? Talking about ****ing where you eat.

But that's the point: people don't decide to stop dealing with them. All of the bad you say Microsoft did, they're still in business. They're still selling. The problem isn't them, it's the customer.

All the griping I hear about Direct TV, but will the complainer ditch it? No, of course not they need their Sunday NFL Ticket! Some might, but only to move on to another carrier who eventually does the same thing. They're all the same. Smart phones, tablet computers, all this crap, people insist they need these things and they use them to play with apps. They text and watch movies on them.

'Bringing it to 'the average' person or 'consumer grade' is what helped them grow into the monsters you don't like. If the truly business-minded only were to buy these products, the companies would become dwarfs. Prices would drop and they'd once again be at the mercy of customers and not vice-versa.

Go anywhere, you don't like the service? '**** you, there's line of consumers behind you who do not care'. Maybe small town companies have to cater to people, but they're not running the business world either. Apple is the tip of the iceberg that you can see; you're seated on, typing on, eating on the rest.

 

[YosemiteSam]

When I see Google, I see a company that struggles to adhere to its own noble beliefs. It desperately wants to be the ally to users, but it also wants to outshine its competitors that you listed above. It's almost like they do something somewhat considered "evil" and then try to do several user-first actions to compensate as penance for it.

#reality

Yeah. I trust Google with a lot of my personal data. If I didn't believe this this was the case, I definitely wouldn't. Of course, that doesn't mean I don't worry about their views changing in the future.

 

[vta]

It would help if the consumer did more homework and put more thought into who they're giving their money to.

It's not just companies acting in unethical ways, it's the 'mindless consumer' forking over their dollars without asking 'why' as well.

Bingo. It's on us.

 

[a_minimalist]

It's almost like they do something somewhat considered "evil" and then try to do several user-first actions to compensate as penance for it.

You see the same thing with some billionaires. Rockefeller and Gates were ruthless businessmen that would do whatever it took keep people from profiting at what they did with their companies. They wanted to be the only ones who provided a service and they didn't want to share. Then when they amass all of this money it's like they try and make up for all of their past behavior by donating tons of money and dedicating the rest of their life to it.

 

[vta]

You see the same thing with some billionaires. Rockefeller and Gates were ruthless businessmen that would do whatever it took keep people from profiting at what they did with their companies. They wanted to be the only ones who provided a service and they didn't want to share. Then when they amass all of this money it's like they try and make up for all of their past behavior by donating tons of money and dedicating the rest of their life to it.

I don't know about Rockerfeller, but Gates gave his fortune - 'donated' - to his and his wife's own charity. Not really too far out of his own reach and control. :/

 

[a_minimalist]

But that's the point: people don't decide to stop dealing with them. All of the bad you say Microsoft did, they're still in business. They're still selling. The problem isn't them, it's the customer.

All the griping I hear about Direct TV, but will the complainer ditch it? No, of course not they need their Sunday NFL Ticket! Some might, but only to move on to another carrier who eventually does the same thing. They're all the same. Smart phones, tablet computers, all this crap, people insist they need these things and they use them to play with apps. They text and watch movies on them.

'Bringing it to 'the average' person or 'consumer grade' is what helped them grow into the monsters you don't like. If the truly business-minded only were to buy these products, the companies would become dwarfs. Prices would drop and they'd once again be at the mercy of customers and not vice-versa.

Go anywhere, you don't like the service? '**** you, there's line of consumers behind you who do not care'. Maybe small town companies have to cater to people, but they're not running the business world either. Apple is the tip of the iceberg that you can see; you're seated on, typing on, eating on the rest.

That's an excellent point!!