3 ms·

While I don't agree with it, I can at least sympathize with the point of view that you should be entitled to abstain from providing data about yourself or your

While I don't agree with it, I can at least sympathize with the point of view that you should be entitled to abstain from providing data about yourself or your behavior to a third party like Google. However, your objection to the use of proprietary software seems completely misguided to me and reeks of overzealous naivety. The software you describe are tools for educating and conveying information. Why don't you object to your being forced to use other proprietary, non-software tools? Your teachers "force" you to use the textbook they select for the course because if every student used a different textbook, the teachers' jobs would become impossible. Why do you accept the "forced" textbook but not the forced software tool? Your teachers force you to use a particular software tool because education would be hopelessly inefficient if every student were using different tools.

the_ancient 11y ago
You honestly can not see the difference between a text book and being required to use software tools that are continually collecting data about you outside of your control...
DadFoundMy 11y ago
I do not necessarily have an issue with using proprietary software; I have an issue with being forced to use proprietary software. I do not think a valid comparison can be drawn to being forced into using a specific textbook. There is nothing "active" about a textbook unlike software. There is nothing hidden away from me that I am unable to see in the textbooks. Any biases or malicious activity will be visible and avoidable. In proprietary software this is not the case.
- mgraczyk 11y ago
  I disagree that "There is nothing hidden away from me that I am unable to see in the textbooks". Biases are often difficult to detect by non-experts. Textbooks commonly reflect the biases of their authors. These biases range from benign (Sedgewick doesn't like parent pointers, so he rants against them in his book) to malevolent (See any social studies text in Texas). Without sufficient knowledge of the subject, a reader may be unaware of the author's biases and will shape his view of the subject based on biased information. Most high school students (and people in general) do not have sufficient knowledge of history to carefully analyze the biases of their author, nor do they have enough time to read enough books to access a balanced view. We accept the negative effects of this bias when the effects are minor, as is the case with most high school textbooks. The benefits of forcing everybody to use the same textbook generally outweigh harm caused by bias.

the_ancient 11y ago

You honestly can not see the difference between a text book and being required to use software tools that are continually collecting data about you outside of your control...

DadFoundMy 11y ago

I do not necessarily have an issue with using proprietary software; I have an issue with being forced to use proprietary software. I do not think a valid comparison can be drawn to being forced into using a specific textbook. There is nothing "active" about a textbook unlike software. There is nothing hidden away from me that I am unable to see in the textbooks. Any biases or malicious activity will be visible and avoidable. In proprietary software this is not the case.

mgraczyk 11y ago
I disagree that "There is nothing hidden away from me that I am unable to see in the textbooks". Biases are often difficult to detect by non-experts. Textbooks commonly reflect the biases of their authors. These biases range from benign (Sedgewick doesn't like parent pointers, so he rants against them in his book) to malevolent (See any social studies text in Texas). Without sufficient knowledge of the subject, a reader may be unaware of the author's biases and will shape his view of the subject based on biased information. Most high school students (and people in general) do not have sufficient knowledge of history to carefully analyze the biases of their author, nor do they have enough time to read enough books to access a balanced view. We accept the negative effects of this bias when the effects are minor, as is the case with most high school textbooks. The benefits of forcing everybody to use the same textbook generally outweigh harm caused by bias.