The article frames Milgram's results as if there is some previously undiscovered optimism in his results. In reality, there is none. A better headline would have been:
"Only half of Milgram's subjects told him to take a hike".
That means the other half could be persuaded (because the certainly did not do this out of their own initiative) to administer lethal electric shocks to another human being. Compliance is a bitch.
It's relative to expectation. Many of us have been hearing about the Milgram results for years. After a while, the shocking side of it seems to be the only significant thing. Reading that transcript (and even more, watching the video of the interview, linked above) is a shock of a different kind, reminding us that there are angels in us and not only devils. The OP took inspiration in that. So do I.
I wonder how many of the more compliant subjects would have changed their tune if they had been in the room when someone like this guy (or the one after him in the video) stood up and refused. In this respect, the laboratory conditions were pretty artificial. In life, the social context is usually much larger. It would be interesting to know under what conditions an individual saying no would have an amplifying effect. Perhaps someone who knows social psychology can cite some work on this.
That means the other half could be persuaded (because the certainly did not do this out of their own initiative) to administer lethal electric shocks to another human being. Compliance is a bitch.