Ah yes, as every smart person knows, only one positive thing can be done (or demanded) at a time.
Weird how well evil parallelizes, though. Really makes you thonk
Unrelated to this themotte post. But it is really weird that
Microsoft is now a ‘cool’ tech company again. (Im very skeptical on the
effectiveness of planting trees in regards to climate change however, it
is more a general statement)
Nah, MS also legit isn't super bad in some ways, like how they sort of embraced open source/etc, them not turning github into a hellhole, not massively spying on people, nor selling them toys that are designed to be e-waste in 2 years, having windows 7 in support for 10 years (and still providing a patch for win xp), etc. (There is still a lot meh about windows itself and I have no idea if they ever fixed their workplace culture which also was meh, so it isn't all good by far (and of course, all big companies are bad, as capitalism is bad)).
> MS also legit isn't super bad in some ways, like how they sort of embraced open source/etc
I know, it's so weird and disorienting. I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop. On the other hand, Windows 10 is dystopian spy- and rent-ware, so I doubt they've really turned over a new leaf.
>nor selling them toys that are designed to be e-waste in 2 years
Aren't MS devices just as impossible to repair as Apple stuff, or have they gotten better about that lately?
No, they are hard to repair, but you can at least open up an xbox, and replace parts. Compared to the earpod which generated 8 billion in revenue last year (according to a 2 seconds google search).
And holy shit for the price of two pairs of earpods you can buy a fucking xbox.
people still use xbox ones (2013 release) now, but a earpod from 2016 now has a dead battery.
E: im myself also susceptible to the hating on hip companies thing as described in the other post, so I'm prob very wrong here btw. Not a fan of apple products. (yes, im still salty about the lack of mouse buttons, bite me).
> No, they are hard to repair, but you can at least open up an xbox, and replace parts. Compared to the earpod which generated 8 billion in revenue last year (according to a 2 seconds google search).
Lol this is precisely the issue of “Microsoft is no longer the biggest so people now cut them more slack.” They’ve got their own wireless earbuds and I’m sure they’re just as impossible to repair as the Apple ones.
Ow totally, I remember hacker old timers talking about the big evil company, which I thought was MS, but it was IBM, certain tech companies are just 'hip to hate' for certain groups.
(I also remember a guy at a conference heckling a guy who worked as MS and who was giving a talk on something, which was really fucking weird and annoying (the subject he was heckling about wasn't what the talk was about, this old nerd was just having a 'MS is evil'! blowout), there really is a problem with people like this in the tech world, socially uncalibrated people who go on long rants about what they see as demons to be slain (and yes, I'm also guilty of this)).
If your premise is that global warming is a hoax perpetuated by
(((Cultural Marxists))) in order to gain more political power (which
seems to be the default view in that sub), then I suppose any
pro-environmental action, especially costly ones, can be labeled as
“insane,” because other than the benefit of the overly complex signaling
games they dream up, it’s basically lighting your money on fire. But
like in a carbon neutral way.
Server farms are pretty energy intensive and account for a considerable amount (I think around 0.3% as a whole) of global emissions. Though MS and Google claim that their data centers are carbon neutral already, so, at least by the way they're measuring it, to get to carbon negative is marginally not such a big deal at this point.
Apparently there was a [big stir](https://github.com/MSworkers/for.ClimateAction) among a coalition of MS employees about MS courting the oil industry, this may be part of efforts to quell that. It does seem at least like Microsoft cares about keeping the climate-minded employees at least somewhat happy, which I can see making a reactionary... react.
They seem viscerally offended that a large company is making a small
effort to combat a huge disaster in order to gain good PR. Like, how
dare you pitch in a small amount to a collective effort.
The poster’s theory is that companies are engaging in this green
washing to recruit what it perceives as more desirable employees. But
like, are there people sitting out there going “nah fuck a company
trying to improve its enviro image, I’m only working for those who
unapologetically fuck up the earth”? And this group has a significant
overlap of the people with the best skills? What is the downside to
trying to recruit enviro-friendly employees?
I'm a hirer for Microsoft and I keep finding that poster as the number one candidate for every job I'm handling, it's astonishing how qualified he is for every single thing, and he'll never know how many women and minorities I've picked instead of him. They'll bring the company down in time by not being as good, but it's worth it, to make sure he doesn't get the jobs he's incredibly qualified for and deserving of.
Microsoft's history is definitely a factor in my never even considering the possibility of working there... The fact that it is [*Catch-22*-level batshit insane](https://danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/#fn:N) is a bigger factor, though.
I think part of their issue is that they are uncomfortable with anything linked to social justice or liberalism in anyway, which in their worldview encompasses protecting the environment and mitigating carbon pollution.
A private company willingly deciding to reduce its negative environmental impact should not bother right wingers — after all, they claim to only be against government coercion, right? But somehow they are mad about this.
It's the same old conservative canard that liberal democracy allows the 'wrong people' ie degenerates to move up the ladder, and the perceived zero sum nature of it all means that the 'right people' ie big brained themotte posters will be displaced from positions in society that they rightly deserve because of it.
They just don't like the idea of someone with green hair and the wrong ideas not grovelling in the streets.
i hate to ruin it for ya, but right in the linked comment:
>I don't think it's original to interpret initiatives like this as a "costly signal" to attract the "right" sort of employees
so not the actual letter of the term but the spirit
Why would a company ever do anything charitable when they can just pay their employees more and assume they’ll spend the extra money charitably?
Unrelated to this themotte post. But it is really weird that Microsoft is now a ‘cool’ tech company again. (Im very skeptical on the effectiveness of planting trees in regards to climate change however, it is more a general statement)
If your premise is that global warming is a hoax perpetuated by (((Cultural Marxists))) in order to gain more political power (which seems to be the default view in that sub), then I suppose any pro-environmental action, especially costly ones, can be labeled as “insane,” because other than the benefit of the overly complex signaling games they dream up, it’s basically lighting your money on fire. But like in a carbon neutral way.
They seem viscerally offended that a large company is making a small effort to combat a huge disaster in order to gain good PR. Like, how dare you pitch in a small amount to a collective effort.
The poster’s theory is that companies are engaging in this green washing to recruit what it perceives as more desirable employees. But like, are there people sitting out there going “nah fuck a company trying to improve its enviro image, I’m only working for those who unapologetically fuck up the earth”? And this group has a significant overlap of the people with the best skills? What is the downside to trying to recruit enviro-friendly employees?
CTRL+F “virtue signalling” returns zero results.
I savour the small silver linings in life.