3 ms·

Thinkpads weren't affected [source] (https://support.lenovo.com/lu/en/product_security/superfish https://support.lenovo.com/lu/en/product_security/superfish).

Thinkpads weren't affected [source] (https://support.lenovo.com/lu/en/product_security/superfish https://support.lenovo.com/lu/en/product_security/superfish). You're welcome to boycott the company, but the corporate models are protected.

closeparen 9y ago
One might boycott a restaurant because they don't like its political activism, labor and sourcing practices, etc. This is much simpler than that. Lenovo served poisoned food. Not as a food-safety oversight, but as a matter of policy. The fact that they only did it for some menu items is irrelevant.
- ianai 9y ago
  Isn’t it possible the Thinkpad lines are managed by different people with different forms of corruption?
  - amerine 9y ago
    Why would we care who the individuals were/are? Corporate personhood is a two way street. If THE company full-willingly serves poison pills without tellling you, why trust them at all? It’s a damn company, who obviously feels they don’t need your trust, so fuck em.
    - ianai 9y ago
      Because it’s not like the group of people looking to install openBSD on something is really a deciding financial block. But we sure still have a right to look for the best available hardware for us.
    - fjsolwmv 9y ago
      That's not what corporate personhood means
- kenning 9y ago
  A better comparison might be that they stole your credit card number. Lenovo did not kill anyone or endanger their lives
  - tischler 9y ago
    Stolen personal information which is later exposed in a data leak can certainly kill someone. In expectation it is less likely than food poisoning, but it still seems ridiculous to downplay the gravity of all of it. That has got to be the most fucked up thing about capitalism: Correction signals are painfully slow, delayed and weak. You can mostly only penalize a company by boycotting their products (unless they seriously break a law), but for the individual, there is often more utility in continuing buying their products than in sending a corrective signal, so the overall signal mostly vanishes except for a small, intellectual minority that can afford extremely high moral standards.
    - closeparen 9y ago
      No, this isn’t a fucked up thing about capitalism. If the state monopoly on computer production did this, you wouldn’t even be able to personally opt out. You’re not going to swing the votes of an electoral majority over a niche and technocratic issue.
brian-armstrong 9y ago
They haven't done it as far as anyone knows

closeparen 9y ago

One might boycott a restaurant because they don't like its political activism, labor and sourcing practices, etc. This is much simpler than that. Lenovo served poisoned food. Not as a food-safety oversight, but as a matter of policy. The fact that they only did it for some menu items is irrelevant.

ianai 9y ago
Isn’t it possible the Thinkpad lines are managed by different people with different forms of corruption?
- amerine 9y ago
  Why would we care who the individuals were/are? Corporate personhood is a two way street. If THE company full-willingly serves poison pills without tellling you, why trust them at all? It’s a damn company, who obviously feels they don’t need your trust, so fuck em.
  - ianai 9y ago
    Because it’s not like the group of people looking to install openBSD on something is really a deciding financial block. But we sure still have a right to look for the best available hardware for us.
  - fjsolwmv 9y ago
    That's not what corporate personhood means
kenning 9y ago
A better comparison might be that they stole your credit card number. Lenovo did not kill anyone or endanger their lives
- tischler 9y ago
  Stolen personal information which is later exposed in a data leak can certainly kill someone. In expectation it is less likely than food poisoning, but it still seems ridiculous to downplay the gravity of all of it. That has got to be the most fucked up thing about capitalism: Correction signals are painfully slow, delayed and weak. You can mostly only penalize a company by boycotting their products (unless they seriously break a law), but for the individual, there is often more utility in continuing buying their products than in sending a corrective signal, so the overall signal mostly vanishes except for a small, intellectual minority that can afford extremely high moral standards.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    No, this isn’t a fucked up thing about capitalism. If the state monopoly on computer production did this, you wouldn’t even be able to personally opt out. You’re not going to swing the votes of an electoral majority over a niche and technocratic issue.

brian-armstrong 9y ago

They haven't done it as far as anyone knows