I asked this questions a while back "Ask HN: Why is it easier to make money by being evil?" (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4609433).<p>I gave an two examples. One of internet companies keeping track of their users and selling the data to the highest bidder. The other is how it's easier to make money selling Orwellian central management software vs employee empowerment software.<p>It seems like it is much easier to succeed by doing evil things instead of doing good. Why is this?
During The Great Depression, farms were having their equipment repossessed for non-payment. The John Deere Tractor Company decided to do no such thing. They told people "At some point, the weather will improve and you will need your tractor. Pay us when you can." Supposedly, for decades afterwards, if a tractor salesman for a different company saw a John Deere on a farm, there was no point in stopping.<p>John Deere is still going strong. I imagine a lot of their competitors went under during The Great Depression. It was impossible to sell the repossessed tractors since no one had any money.<p>I am feeling pretty bitter (about my personal situation) and feeling like, yes, evil wins. But I am not convinced the objective evidence really bears that out.
Why are your examples "evil"?<p>Your first one might mean gmail serves me ads for chicken wings (which I want) instead of diapers (which I don't). Is that evil?<p>As for the second, banks are under Orwellian central management - every penny is recorded going in and coming out. Is that evil, or is that good for everyone who holds a deposit? What's employee empowerment software exactly, anyway?
It is demonstrably not the case that it is easier to make money through evil than good, at least historically; the world we live in now is quite nice compared to the past, and that's the result of selfish people following incentives. If incentives were aligned with evil, we would expect to live in an evil world, and we do not.<p>There <i>is</i> evil around every corner for sure, but it is outweighed by the good. Sure there are incentives for scummy business practices that add a bit of evil on the margin, but do you really think most companies are a net negative? That that marginal evil isn't outweighed by the vast good and wealth that is created as well?<p>The question you should have asked is "Why do i <i>think</i> incentives align with evil?", and the answer is "Because you take the good for granted and thereby fail to notice it."<p>We're on the <i>Internet</i>. Show me some evil that outweighs the awesomeness of <i>that</i>.
"The love of money is the root of all evil"<p>It might be more of a case of motivation. Sociopaths don't care what others think so they'll go for it, the consequences be damned. On the other hand, nice people, who are the majority, will only go as far as their conscience allows them. So in business terms "they choke". Of course, the tendencies of greed and ego are in collusion.<p>To give just one example, bankers gave housing loans even to people who couldn't afford them. Then they foreclosed on those homes. A "nice" banker would have said "Sorry, you can't afford that house. How about a more modest one." The result the nice banker would miss out on the business. The borrower going with the one that made the bigger home attainable.
Ethics (good or bad) are not enough alone to make a particular action viable. Usually you need a community of people who are prepared to believe that a particular action is "good". At that point social pressure is enough to push people down a path regardless of the actual benefits or costs. This can be hugely beneficial (charitable donation) or very very bad. I don't think you can get the good without the bad. A lot of good human behavior would be lost of people only acted on logic.
I reprint a letter I just received (inscribed on human skin) for your edification:<p>Dear Humans<p>I hereby reclaim the word "evil". It seems to have worked for "queer" by those San Francisco guys, so I am trying it for evil.<p>As The Lord of Lies I have put in plenty of effort over the centuries, encouraging wars, rape and torture. it takes quite a lot of effort to persuade someone to hang a pregnant woman extra high and then to slice open her belly to let the foetus dangle too - but I think you will agree that that's pretty evil. The march of technology has helped (guns guns guns!) but real evil still takes the personal touch.<p>so imagine my horror when people call scummy business practises "evil". I mean ohhh that guy is aggregating my click throughs to sell more toasters. Where is the soul-destroying fear in that? I mean I used to call retargeting what happened when you make a mother choose which child to have shot. now it's <i>marketing</i><p>No thank you. you keep your evil empire and your "don't be evil" slogans. I will summon up the deepest devils from the pit and head to Syria, where I can show you all what words like evil really mean. Pleasant dreams.<p>yours<p>Belezebub
Desperation in the common man to keep himself and his children afloat creates opportunities for the wicked man because a desperate man cannot afford to have social vigilance.
If you look at the economy from a global point of view, you can see the money is constantly flowing between good an evil. It's the ying and the yang. You can choose to see the good or the evil but they're both there always seeking an unreachable equilibrium, like the waves in the ocean.<p>Some people out there are doing "evil" right now keep you safe warm and cozy.
Evil and good are relative, one can't exist or be defined without the other. Universe destroys and creates at the same time, neither of them is good or bad.