3 ms·

> Please consider to stop using/contributing to software of companies, if you don't agree with the way they conduct business or treat their users. I'm of the o

by voidr 9y ago

> Please consider to stop using/contributing to software of companies, if you don't agree with the way they conduct business or treat their users. I'm of the opinion that we should separate the art from the artist. If Facebook would discover the cure for all cancer and make it available freely to the world, would you still encourage people to not use it just because Facebook does user tracking(which is covered in their terms that you agree to when you sign up)?

amelius 9y ago
> I'm of the opinion that we should separate the art from the artist. By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. Separation is not really possible. > If Facebook would discover the cure for all cancer and make it available freely to the world, would you still encourage people to not use it just because Facebook does user tracking Facebook does not have a cure for cancer. Perhaps if all the intellectual workforce that is now invoked to track users and please advertisers would be used to search for a cure instead, we would have a cure by now. As an another analogy (as you brought one up) I'm not supporting banks and financial institutions that support the weapons industry, even if that bank provides the highest interest. Also, like I said, there are alternatives, and they will become better when more people support them.
- voidr 9y ago
  > As an another analogy (as you brought one up) I'm not supporting banks and financial institutions that support the weapons industry, even if that bank provides the highest interest. If you live in the US or the UK and pay your taxes, you are by this logic supporting weapons manufacturing and selling it to Saudi Arabia[1][2]. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/saudi-arabia-arms-sales-yemen-war-uk-government-us-donald-trump-obama-aid-a7643066.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/saudi-arabia-arms-sales-... [2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-us-100-billion-arms-deal-saudi-arabia-a7733871.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-us-10... > Facebook does not have a cure for cancer. Perhaps if all the intellectual workforce that is now invoked to track users and please advertisers would be used to search for a cure instead, we would have a cure by now. The point is not about Facebook's medical research capabilities, the point is: if an entity you disagree with would produce an invention so useful that it could save lives, would you still reject their invention? > By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. Separation is not really possible. In your opinion one organization cannot do both good and bad things at the same time?
  - aloisdg 9y ago
    It is easiest to switch framework than to change country. You don't have to be perfect, you just have to suck less.
- pluma 9y ago
  > By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. I hope you're actively boycotting Coca Cola and Nestlé products (including their myriads of affiliated brands) then, because by purchasing them you're directly supporting the bad practices of those companies. And let's not forget the unethical practices of other tech companies like Google and Apple. Facebook's open-source projects are open-source. You don't give them money to use them. You don't pay them by contributing. No money changes hands. If literally Hitler produced an awesome tech framework and published it as open-source, I would still use it if it's good and I would see no ethical problem with that either. It's not about who creates technology, it's about how it is used. The benefit Facebook derives from outsiders contributing to React is minute compared to the benefit other people who are not Facebook derive, who can use React to build amazing things to help people and potentially even harm Facebook indirectly. Tu quoque, maybe, but this is an exceptionally strange hill to die on. You can hate a company with a vengeance and want it destroyed and still benefit from their open-source efforts. Just make sure you can still move on if needed to avoid lock-in (but I suppose you've never heard of Preact).
  - amelius 9y ago
    > If literally Hitler produced an awesome tech framework and published it as open-source, I would still use it if it's good and I would see no ethical problem with that either. Okay, at this point I'm convinced that you are just trying to rationalize yourself out of the essence of this discussion. Like I said elsewhere, open-source is not a one-way proposition. It benefits Facebook to a great extent.

by voidr 9y ago

amelius 9y ago

> I'm of the opinion that we should separate the art from the artist. By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. Separation is not really possible. > If Facebook would discover the cure for all cancer and make it available freely to the world, would you still encourage people to not use it just because Facebook does user tracking Facebook does not have a cure for cancer. Perhaps if all the intellectual workforce that is now invoked to track users and please advertisers would be used to search for a cure instead, we would have a cure by now. As an another analogy (as you brought one up) I'm not supporting banks and financial institutions that support the weapons industry, even if that bank provides the highest interest. Also, like I said, there are alternatives, and they will become better when more people support them.

voidr 9y ago
> As an another analogy (as you brought one up) I'm not supporting banks and financial institutions that support the weapons industry, even if that bank provides the highest interest. If you live in the US or the UK and pay your taxes, you are by this logic supporting weapons manufacturing and selling it to Saudi Arabia[1][2]. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/saudi-arabia-arms-sales-yemen-war-uk-government-us-donald-trump-obama-aid-a7643066.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/saudi-arabia-arms-sales-... [2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-us-100-billion-arms-deal-saudi-arabia-a7733871.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-us-10... > Facebook does not have a cure for cancer. Perhaps if all the intellectual workforce that is now invoked to track users and please advertisers would be used to search for a cure instead, we would have a cure by now. The point is not about Facebook's medical research capabilities, the point is: if an entity you disagree with would produce an invention so useful that it could save lives, would you still reject their invention? > By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. Separation is not really possible. In your opinion one organization cannot do both good and bad things at the same time?
- aloisdg 9y ago
  It is easiest to switch framework than to change country. You don't have to be perfect, you just have to suck less.
pluma 9y ago
> By using and supporting Facebook's open-source projects, you are supporting their bad practices indirectly. I hope you're actively boycotting Coca Cola and Nestlé products (including their myriads of affiliated brands) then, because by purchasing them you're directly supporting the bad practices of those companies. And let's not forget the unethical practices of other tech companies like Google and Apple. Facebook's open-source projects are open-source. You don't give them money to use them. You don't pay them by contributing. No money changes hands. If literally Hitler produced an awesome tech framework and published it as open-source, I would still use it if it's good and I would see no ethical problem with that either. It's not about who creates technology, it's about how it is used. The benefit Facebook derives from outsiders contributing to React is minute compared to the benefit other people who are not Facebook derive, who can use React to build amazing things to help people and potentially even harm Facebook indirectly. Tu quoque, maybe, but this is an exceptionally strange hill to die on. You can hate a company with a vengeance and want it destroyed and still benefit from their open-source efforts. Just make sure you can still move on if needed to avoid lock-in (but I suppose you've never heard of Preact).
- amelius 9y ago
  > If literally Hitler produced an awesome tech framework and published it as open-source, I would still use it if it's good and I would see no ethical problem with that either. Okay, at this point I'm convinced that you are just trying to rationalize yourself out of the essence of this discussion. Like I said elsewhere, open-source is not a one-way proposition. It benefits Facebook to a great extent.