Home Original page

Microsoft Hatred FAQ

David Schwartz davids at webmaster.com
Wed Oct 19 04:57:32 EDT 2005 
"Roedy Green" <my_email_is_posted_on_my_website at munged.invalid> wrote in 
message news:io1cl1tv54gs7epehprk566spfs2bln3if at 4ax.com...

> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 23:18:31 -0700, "David Schwartz"
> <davids at webmaster.com> wrote or quoted :

>>    Perhaps you aren't following the thread, but I was talking about the
>>obligations a company has, not the obligations any individual has. And I 
>>was
>>talking about obligations *to* individuals.

> To me that makes no sense. Microsoft is an abstraction. It can't do
> anything. It can't make decisions. Only the individuals to work for it
> or on the board can, though they may do it in Microsoft's name.  If
> you want to talk about moral action, obligation etc. you can't divorce
> that from the people who do the actions.

    If anything that makes the objection even less meaningful. The objection 
was:

> Why should loyalty to company trump all other loyalties -- family,
> law, species,  community, country, religion ... ?

    And the answer is that I'm not talking about "loyalty to company" but 
loyalty to shareholders, which are people. Of course, a person is never 
required to do anything that actually conflicts with their conscience, 
although in some cases this may require you to quit.

    DS
More information about the Python-list mailing list