4 ms·

It is a shame that you are being downvoted. I (like a lot of people here) disagree with you, but you have a point of view shared by a lot of people. It's an imp

It is a shame that you are being downvoted. I (like a lot of people here) disagree with you, but you have a point of view shared by a lot of people. It's an important point of view to consider and engage with because my impression is that it's the majority view from the population - based on their actions, they don't care about their data privacy if it gets them gmail for free. For a lot of people they possibly hold that view due to a lack of understanding about the situation, but some people like you understand the situation and still are OK with it. That's an entirely reasonable point of view which should be eagerly debated with.

altfredd 8y ago
> It is a shame that you are being downvoted. I (like a lot of people here) disagree with you, but you have a point of view shared by a lot of people. People are notoriously bad at acting in their own best interest. I recall reading a forum, where a guy asked for medical advice, because he was diagnosed with fibrosis (his lungs basically got scarred all over). His work required him to continuously inhale toxic exhaust, and he wanted a way to avoid further health complications (but keep a work!) because "the pay was good". Fibrosis causes you to cough non-stop and significantly increases probability of dying from lung infection. Compared to that, using Google's products does not result in any visible long-term effects on health. Therefore, it is natural to conclude, that using Google's sites and services is safe, healthy and should be widely encouraged. It does not matter, that Google uses anti-competitive practices to monopolize market, restrict user freedom and lead us to future, when we won't be able to refuse shoehorned "services", shoved in our face, right? Please stop with those creepy "understanding" antics. Encouraging self-harm is bad, and wishing to view advertisements is definitely a form of self-harm.
- sridca 8y ago
  This is such a patronizing point of view. You are essentially deciding for me that what I choose to do with my technological choices is "a form of self-harm" (when in fact I only experience total pleasure). Is it really that hard to comprehend that, when one does not share the alarmist feelings of the crowd, they will make intelligent choices based on personal preferences?

altfredd 8y ago

> It is a shame that you are being downvoted. I (like a lot of people here) disagree with you, but you have a point of view shared by a lot of people. People are notoriously bad at acting in their own best interest. I recall reading a forum, where a guy asked for medical advice, because he was diagnosed with fibrosis (his lungs basically got scarred all over). His work required him to continuously inhale toxic exhaust, and he wanted a way to avoid further health complications (but keep a work!) because "the pay was good". Fibrosis causes you to cough non-stop and significantly increases probability of dying from lung infection. Compared to that, using Google's products does not result in any visible long-term effects on health. Therefore, it is natural to conclude, that using Google's sites and services is safe, healthy and should be widely encouraged. It does not matter, that Google uses anti-competitive practices to monopolize market, restrict user freedom and lead us to future, when we won't be able to refuse shoehorned "services", shoved in our face, right? Please stop with those creepy "understanding" antics. Encouraging self-harm is bad, and wishing to view advertisements is definitely a form of self-harm.

sridca 8y ago
This is such a patronizing point of view. You are essentially deciding for me that what I choose to do with my technological choices is "a form of self-harm" (when in fact I only experience total pleasure). Is it really that hard to comprehend that, when one does not share the alarmist feelings of the crowd, they will make intelligent choices based on personal preferences?