4 ms·
I couldn't help but cringe every time the word "used" was used for "user" after the first occurence.
by fwr 10y ago
I couldn't help but cringe every time the word "used" was used for "user" after the first occurence.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- vonklaus 10y agoHe's not wrong. edit: Per emsy's suggestion: I mean that he is just articulating that if something is free, you are the product, except he(stallman) articulates it by changing the noun to reflect his viewpoint. also, I just deleted facebook.
- emsy 10y agoSad to see you downvoted, because he articulated a common sentiment (if something is free, you are the product) with a stylistic device. I guess your reply should've included that.
- weinzierl 10y agoIf you are referring to the Lebowsky quote: I used to believe that to be true about Stallman too. Now I believe he is just right, what makes him so obnoxious is just that his truths are so inconvenient.
- vonklaus 10y agonegative, if I were to refer to the Big Lebowsky quote (and not care about HN guidelines) I would've posted something like: He's not wrong, but the parent commenter is an asshole. But that would of course not be in the spirit of HN and I am sure that they must realize whether they cringe or not RMS is still going to have a pretty consistent view of the matter. edit: It actually is annoying how correct he is. FB was pretty nice, but I deactivated my account because I disagree with FB and this reminded me to have the conviction to actually vote. I voted against LinkedIn, Bank of AMerica, Facebook, some google services and Instagram so far this year. I voted for Gitlabs, Digital Ocean, Simple Bank and the Apple ecosystem.
- MaysonL 10y agoif something is free, you are the product Does that hold true for useds of Gnu, also?
- xkcd-sucks 10y agoYes, we're used for development, marketing, and QA.
- capote 10y agoThis does give it a kind of bearded-conspiracy-theorist-ish vibe that puts me off too. But the underlying point in using the word makes sense and hey, maybe it'll deter some people from using Facebook without knowing exactly what they're subjecting themselves to. I can see such a thing sticking in people's minds.
- Fajita_Mane 10y agoI think it's going to take someone with greater...ahem...social intelligence than rms to convey the dire reality of facebook's omniscience.
- guard-of-terra 10y agoSo you're understanding the grave seriousness of the considerations, but still waiting for somebody different to convey that to you?
- oldmanjay 10y agoNo. The point is well understood and so poorly expressed that is actually repellent. It's not the "somebody" so much as the way "somebody" insists on using transparently manipulative rhetoric. It's very off-putting even to those of us who agree.
- guard-of-terra 10y agoSometimes off-putting is what your need. They don't put unicorns kindly asking you to quit on cigarette packs. There they put lung cancer pics. Stallman's points are digital equivalent of cancer pics. "Quit or you'll see more, every day". And no, I'm not 100% sure that works. Regulations surely do, tho.
- loktarogar 10y agoTo use your analogy, it's not the lung cancer pictures that are putting people off, it's the fact that in this case someone put a exaggerated cartoon picture of lung cancer, and while they know that the cancer is a real thing they can't take seriously the exaggerated imagery. It's not the message, it's the way the message is conveyed
- trott 10y ago"Usee" is a perfectly cromulent word that could be used here instead.
- AckSyn 10y agoIt embiggens my soul.