22 ms·
This is like saying child labor is a band-aid, not a solution, but that we shouldn't ban it because it helps children. The whole point is that it's an inherentl
by not_kurt_godel 8y ago
This is like saying child labor is a band-aid, not a solution, but that we shouldn't ban it because it helps children. The whole point is that it's an inherently exploitative thing that is a net negative for society even with people who need money getting paid.
- scrollaway 8y agoRight, because installing spyware is the same thing as forcing young kids to work. What? No questions, this is creepy. But nobody was talking about a ban. The post I replied to asked whether we should be okay with people who need $20 that badly. The answer is no, we shouldn't be ok with it. But you're not solving the situation by banning this, you're making it worse if anything. "We shouldn't be ok with people being homeless." "Okay, let's make 'being homeless' illegal. Problem solved!" "???" And yes, this logic has been used before. It hasn't solved homelessness, btw.
- not_kurt_godel 8y agoWe shouldn't be ok with people needing money that badly, and we also shouldn't be ok with creating an economic dependency on those people selling their privacy, the same way we've banned economic dependency on child labor. That is not at all equivalent to banning homelessness. It's more like banning hiring homeless people to fight lions with their bare hands for entertainment.