View Single Comment

Fri Jan 11 19 02:04pm
(Updated 2 times)

I'll say this last thing and leave it at that: In the past it has almost exclusively been the companies themselves making these decisions off their own back, usually a couple of marketing men or lawyers or whomever, which many rational people disagreed with at the time too. And there's obviously some prominent cases of legal situations like with the whole Night Trap and Mortal Kombat thing, but those were and are still very rare, thankfully. These days, however, it's more often than not the kinds of people I'm talking about affecting the decisions of these companies, people who aren't at all directly connected to the companies (and often not even customers of those companies), by virtue of how influential social media is in today's society. So, as a random example, when a human being actually loses their job simply because they said something that some ignoramuses didn't like, which was actually completely correct and true, but the company knows it's going to get the Internet up in arms, that's not right at all. I'm talking about the recent case with some dude saying there was in fact some differences between men and women and then he got fired, from Google I think it was. And that's where the problem today is quite dramatically different to how it's been in the past for most part (are more worrying and something we have to keep a better eye on): It's basically the ignorant Internet mob of OTT PC do-gooders calling most of the shots. That's not a good thing, and speaking up against is not automatically a bad thing. You can't just paint both sides as the bad guys because they bug you personally--one is actually the root-cause of the issue and the other is just a symptom of it for the most part. And we have to treat the cause, which means diagnosing it first (as recognizing and in calling it out), before we can cure the illness.