Hacker News Reader

Comment by croes | Hacker News Reader

Regardless of how they treat their employees?

Yes. That’s a problem to sort out between the employees and the company, it has nothing do to with users or customers. As a user I’m not going to pretend I know any of the relevant context to engage in activism on behalf of anyone.

So if a company uses slave workers, child labor, sweatshops it's non of the customers business?

Isn't it part of the market mechanisms that customers punish bad behavior?

Do you claim songtradr uses slave, or child labor?

I just turned up my example to make my point.

If we don't care about the employees, who does?

If we care only under certain circumstances, where is the limit?

Union busting, unpaid overtime, forced labor?

The issue has its context, and producing outrage out of thin air to shame a commenter into submission ain't helping you to make any point, really. It's a well-known fallacy which you are invoking

What fallacy?

The customer either has responsibility or he hasn't.

And if somebody feels ashamed because they realize they can't ignore how a product or service they use is made, proves my point.

If they say they deny responsibility, then I can give severe examples to ask: Are you sure?

Huh? They are making a legitimate point by testing a person's claimed commitments against a hypothetical example. When did pretending not to understand hypotheticals become a thing?

All of those things are illegal in the country where Bandcamp operates. I think we customers already care to the extent that we ought to, and beyond that we should only insist that legal process be followed.

I don't care so much about Bandcamp that I'll make a personal judgement in their case, and personally investigate the details of their situation.

Market mechanisms have proven completely unreliable at stopping such things, given how few actually give a damn about nestle’s long time child labor and slavery problem.

Is there a company more boycotted than Nestlé? I know I haven't bought anything from them for many years.

Maybe not (by some measures at least) but that is the point. They are still the largest food company in the world and one of the largest companies of any kind. Are you sure you aren't buying anything from them? They have a large number of brands and are always buying more. You can't always tell by looking at the package. Not that long ago a website error that mentioned Nestlé tipped me off that a supplement brand I was considering was owned by them and it turns out they now own several very popular supplement brands. I still think it is important to do your best to avoid such companies but it seems not enough people do this to have much effect even in the worst cases.

Reasonably sure, yeah. Not only am I somewhat sure that you can indeed always tell by the packaging (at least here in Germany), I also check the list of companies every 6 to 12 months.

And yeah, the most boycotted company (assuming it is true) means there is barely any effect. People don't boycott, many people don't even care enough to talk, far fewer want to walk.

I'm glad it is easier to tell there. In the US there are no such requirements :(. I've noticed looking at web sites of various companies that there seems to be some basic disclosure requirements in some EU countries that are helpful (like a contact address, which many companies don't have on their website in most of the world).

It's odd how we blame the market mechanism but not the people that "don't give a damn".

Ironically, it's almost as if you (the person complaining about the market mechanism) don't want to boycot those people that don't give a damn. It's inconvenient isn't it? Imagine having to shun your friend, kick out your tenant or fire your employee because they wore a slave-labour Nike shoe. It's much easier to blame a market mechanism.

We can only control ourselves and alas, we are the minority. So blaming everyone else is pointless.

Blaming a system that we can regulate and allows companies to get away with shady practices sounds way more reasonable to me.

Those things are bad because the people involved are not able to consent. The journalists and techies working for band camp entered into voluntary contracts that they can leave at any time. To equate the two is absurd.

I love Bandcamp a lot, and as long as they continue to provide great service and treat everybody well, I'll absolutely continue to spend money with them.

And "everybody" does include their employees. If a company doesn't treat their employees decently, they aren't a good company and I will avoid doing business with them.

The "right to have a non-productive job" does not and should not exist, even if employees get upset.

It's not a right, it's mandatory for many.

Why are you letting your compassion get in the way of your pleasure?

People are social animals.

Besides, wireheading will soon be possible. Best to re-evaluate your pleasure from time-to-time, while you can.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com