The “move fast, break laws, reap profits, socialize losses” strategy.
Fuck em. Fuck em all with a fork in the eye.
“move fast and break things” applied to the ecology and humans. Except without the “fix it” stage
Gross “We did it knowing nobody was going to prosecute us because Trump and that’s what bribes are for” reasons.
Better to pay the small fine, than ask permission.
Fuck the techbros, fuck AI, fuck data centers, fuck billionaires.
You know how people have been doing those horrible crimes where they destroy datacentres?
I hope people don’t realize the same thing can be done to places like Google’s offices. But if they do, I also hope they’d be responsible enough to make sure no low/mid level employees were in the building. I bet, and this is just too sad, that the executives would be the prime targets 😔
That would be tragic. Super duper tragic.
So tragic.
Tragic.
When the fines aren’t big enough, they’re just the cost of doing business.
Penalties for fuckery like this should be at GDPR levels, meaning a percentage of global turnover of the parent company.
that’s the entire point of fines, to internalize external costs.
If it’s still profitable after full enforcement of fines then either the fines were not correctly set or the buisness model is a net positive.
Wasn’t their slogan, “Be as evil as possible” ?
Ecodefense is a pretty good and relevant light read!
Add it to KilledByGoogle.com
Google’s green image looks increasingly like a marketing layer over an industrial land grab. A company worth trillions wants ever more land, power and water for AI, and now it’s accused of clearing Finnish forest before environmental assessments were complete.
The things that truly “slipped their leash” recently are the fucking tech companies.
They need a good humbling, and their own hubris will be the thing to do it.
Yeah, it’s negligence. They gambled on any paltry fine being worth it, and still being allowed o proceed.
If there’s one thing big business exceeds at, it’s killing life.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Amazing how no one here opened and read the link but still felt they have to comment a wall of angry dogma.
I’ve read the article and I don’t really understand your comment. Could you elaborate?
Did you read the other comments here?
