4 ms·
> [googlers] were wondering why the new behaviour might feel abusive to some people. That says something about how out of touch Google is at the moment.
by JoshMnem 8y ago
> [googlers] were wondering why the new behaviour might feel abusive to some people.
That says something about how out of touch Google is at the moment.
- Karunamon 8y agoI daresay this comment might apply more to us than to Google. To 99% of people, these features are useful and helpful, with the downsides being mostly philosophical or theoretical.
- dredmorbius 8y ago"Not immediately apparent" is neither theoretical nor philosophical. It's sufficiently reliable a behaviour, however, that it's eminently bankable. Most especially in Silicon Valley's surveillance capitalism world. Data are liability. They're long-term toxic waste. But as with earlier forms of toxic waste, they return profits to those who ignore, conceal, or confuse as to the true deferred costs.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- JoshMnem 8y agoTaking away choices, privacy, and freedom is not a theoretical problem. Most users would not consent to it if they fully understood it.
- 706f6f70 8y ago> To 99% of people, these features are useful and helpful, with the downsides being mostly philosophical or theoretical. There is something there that makes it comparable to the early nature conservation movements. Fast forward a couple generations and nearly 99% of the population is pretty convinced on climate change and that we've messed up quite severely - but not enough to stop messing up.