4 ms·
>The author's validity comes into question with how alarming the tone of this post is What, exactly, is so alarming about the tone? I'd also be curious as to
by forgetsusername 11y ago
>The author's validity comes into question with how alarming the tone of this post is
What, exactly, is so alarming about the tone? I'd also be curious as to why an app is accessing my contacts so often. There might even be valid battery-life concerns.
>and how he gave the company a week to respond to a non-important question
It's important to the customer. I guess this is lost on the SV people who no longer believe that people from the company selling you a service should actually be accessible. But there was a time when if you had a question, like "why is your product using so many of my phone's resources?" you could have it answered. A week certainly isn't unreasonable, especially for a journalist.
>tells me all I need to know about this.
Disagree with review; dismiss article? Do you think there's some kind of agenda?
- AndrewKemendo 11y agoI think the OP was insinuating that the writer is not technically competent enough to be authoritatively evaluating technology to such a degree.
- oldmanjay 11y agoThe article's tone isn't alarming, but I'd guess the OP meant alarmist, which kind of fits. The author's argument certainly doesn't present a clear path from the inciting incident to any of the conclusions, so I also feel comfortable dismissing it. There isn't much use for emotional persuasive writing about technological issues outside of handwringing, and handwringing is boring to many of us.