Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 9260256" data-attributes="member: 15700">Yep.  As far as I can tell:Everyone involved seem like decent folksThere is no proof Mr. Scott used AI, blockchain, or sold customer information, and he has assured that he would not.Here's the thing though, you (general you) don't need proof to feel like there might be a problem. We do it all the time.  I will fully admit it might not be fair to Mr. Scott and EGG, but that's reality with businesses.  Because we also know:A blockchain and AI investor is a major investor into EGGAn investor of EGG publicly stated their intent with customer dataSeveral employees have all resigned stating the same reason (ethical concerns)It is true that EGG has not been proven to have done anything wrong and also true for the above, which are red flags. I am only speaking for myself now, and will be using generic terms. If a CEO says they aren't doing things that their investors want them to do and investors have said themselves what they expect the company to do, that makes me worried that the company will end up doing that thing (me personally, as I understand others have no problems with a company using AI or selling customer data).  And when several employees start resigning, that makes it more worrying. So really, I think it all comes down to an individual person on what they are comfortable with when supporting a company. A person can be wary of supporting EGG while at the same time EGG not doing anything wrong. Just like someone can be happy supporting EGG even if they do end up using AI or selling customer data. It's something subjective as personal ethics. I've heard Mr. Scott's reassurances. I have no reason to not believe or trust him. It's also fair for me to still have reservations based on what the investors are saying because I know what influence investors traditionally have (EGG might be an exception, but we never know until time goes by). I'd rather avoid the he said/they said part of this discussion because as mentioned, some folks can't tell their story, some don't want to rehash it, and often these things devolve into speculation and hurt feelings.  I don't want anyone involved to have hurt feelings; that's not fair to them. For me, right now, I think that's the highest priority--how these folks are being impacted, and respecting the difficulty they are going through. I really want to avoid using these folks as "ammunition" to gotcha the other side.  These are people, not data points.</blockquote>

Verification