8 ms·

Great points! Short answer: it's an imperfect mix of open source, privacy centered, indie projects vs proprietary, mainstream corporations, VC funded etc. Hope

Great points! Short answer: it's an imperfect mix of open source, privacy centered, indie projects vs proprietary, mainstream corporations, VC funded etc. Hope that you and others interested in this topic will get involved with criticism ans suggestions here on on our forum in order to improve the list, devise a clearer "checklist" for listings, submit more stuff, etc: https://community.ethical.net/t/suggestions-for-our-ethical-resources-directory/105 https://community.ethical.net/t/suggestions-for-our-ethical-...

cblades 7y ago
You shouldn't use the term "ethical" without very clearly defining your definition of ethical upfront. If someone proposes to me that murder isn't ethical, I can more-or-less get on board with that without a bunch of defining and qualifying. You're talking about software though. To suggest that Open Office is ethically superior to MS Office is not at all self-evident or the general consensus of most people. It comes off as you being oblivious or close-minded to competing ideas of ethics, which doesn't lend credibility to your use of the term.
- mancuso5 7y ago
  Thanks for taking time to contribute to the cause :)
  - cblades 7y ago
    Also, taking a snarky, passive-agressive tone to people making legitimate criticisms makes me not trust the list at all. By saying "this is ethical, that is not", you are assuming a position that must be defended. edit: I am contributing to the cause. Ethics is necessarily a conversation. By minimizing and handwaving away the part of ethical decision making that actually matters, you're doing more harm than good. We don't need users to blindly use services somebody has slapped the "ethical" label on, we need to inspire users to bring ethics into their decision making process when choosing software services.
- DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
  > If someone proposes to me that murder isn't ethical, I can more-or-less get on board with that without a bunch of defining and qualifying. I think "murder" is an excellent example for making your main point. Because even that term would need further qualifications about euthanasia, abortion, capital punishment, etc.
  - rootusrootus 7y ago
    Murder is by definition unlawful. Homicide is the term that would include euthanasia, abortion, execution.
    - dwighttk 7y ago
      Unless those things are unlawful. In which case they would be murder in addition to homicide.
- danShumway 7y ago
  I really don't see the problem here. This is a single list, curated by one source. It doesn't need to be credible, it's not a standard. OP isn't trying to shame anyone for using other software or force companies to fix things; they're making a resource so you can find software that meets their particular criteria, even if their particular criteria is ill-defined. The point is to help people find software that they might not have heard of, not to form a definitive checklist. Extrapolate this idea out -- if someone walks up to you and says, "hey, play Baba is You, it's really fun," it would be weird to respond, "Yeah, but what is your definition of fun? How can I trust you without one?"
  - cblades 7y ago
    The value in coming up with a list of ethical services is the conversation around defining ethical and how those services conform with that definition.
    - danShumway 7y ago
      Again, extrapolate that out to other contexts. Is the value of a Steam recommendation list the conversation around defining "fun" and how each game conforms with that definition? Or is it a way to quickly find good games you haven't heard of? When you read an Amazon review, do you think, "well, this will give me some insight into the nature of quality in general?" Or do you think, "I wonder if Arnold35X subjectively liked this vacuum cleaner?" Of course there's personal value in trying to narrow and understand your own definition of ethical -- you could read through a list like this and pick out the products you agree with, and then ask yourself, "why do I agree or disagree with them?" That would be great. But OP themselves is under no obligation in this context to justify their decisions to anyone. Their opinion could be, "ethical software has to be written in Lisp." They're here to help you narrow down the software you know, and to find new software. That's it. Curation is not consensus. This is the equivalent of showing up on an Open Source project and forcing the maintainer to justify their choice in testing libraries. The software is on the list because OP decided to put it there, and because OP is the one that made the list. In the context of this specific list, OP is God. If you think their definition is too broad or ill-defined, make another list with a more narrow one.
samirillian 7y ago
Damn, nothing like scrolling that forum to remind you of one simple fact: _there can be no ethical consumption under capitalism_. Though I still love the list, haha.
O1111OOO 7y ago
> it's an imperfect mix ... others interested in this topic will get involved with criticism ans suggestions here on on our forum... It's a great start! Lots of programs and services I wasn't aware existed. There are some services I'm familiar with that I don't think belong on the list (given my own interpretation of ethical as it relates to modern computing) and am happy to see that suggestions are welcomed via the community forums. Surprised & delighted to see sections like Organizations, Magazines and Newsletters, Books and even Films - since most similar lists focus on applications instead of voices. It's these extra sections that really highlight and bring together the larger community concerned with these issues and helps open my eyes to other issues that don't normally penetrate my bubble of news. I can see most of these sections growing to include many more sites. The only immediate suggestion - short of separating the sections into their own pages - is a "detailed" list view to help make the information more manageable.

cblades 7y ago

You shouldn't use the term "ethical" without very clearly defining your definition of ethical upfront. If someone proposes to me that murder isn't ethical, I can more-or-less get on board with that without a bunch of defining and qualifying. You're talking about software though. To suggest that Open Office is ethically superior to MS Office is not at all self-evident or the general consensus of most people. It comes off as you being oblivious or close-minded to competing ideas of ethics, which doesn't lend credibility to your use of the term.

mancuso5 7y ago
Thanks for taking time to contribute to the cause :)
- cblades 7y ago
  Also, taking a snarky, passive-agressive tone to people making legitimate criticisms makes me not trust the list at all. By saying "this is ethical, that is not", you are assuming a position that must be defended. edit: I am contributing to the cause. Ethics is necessarily a conversation. By minimizing and handwaving away the part of ethical decision making that actually matters, you're doing more harm than good. We don't need users to blindly use services somebody has slapped the "ethical" label on, we need to inspire users to bring ethics into their decision making process when choosing software services.
DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
> If someone proposes to me that murder isn't ethical, I can more-or-less get on board with that without a bunch of defining and qualifying. I think "murder" is an excellent example for making your main point. Because even that term would need further qualifications about euthanasia, abortion, capital punishment, etc.
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  Murder is by definition unlawful. Homicide is the term that would include euthanasia, abortion, execution.
  - dwighttk 7y ago
    Unless those things are unlawful. In which case they would be murder in addition to homicide.
danShumway 7y ago
I really don't see the problem here. This is a single list, curated by one source. It doesn't need to be credible, it's not a standard. OP isn't trying to shame anyone for using other software or force companies to fix things; they're making a resource so you can find software that meets their particular criteria, even if their particular criteria is ill-defined. The point is to help people find software that they might not have heard of, not to form a definitive checklist. Extrapolate this idea out -- if someone walks up to you and says, "hey, play Baba is You, it's really fun," it would be weird to respond, "Yeah, but what is your definition of fun? How can I trust you without one?"
- cblades 7y ago
  The value in coming up with a list of ethical services is the conversation around defining ethical and how those services conform with that definition.
  - danShumway 7y ago
    Again, extrapolate that out to other contexts. Is the value of a Steam recommendation list the conversation around defining "fun" and how each game conforms with that definition? Or is it a way to quickly find good games you haven't heard of? When you read an Amazon review, do you think, "well, this will give me some insight into the nature of quality in general?" Or do you think, "I wonder if Arnold35X subjectively liked this vacuum cleaner?" Of course there's personal value in trying to narrow and understand your own definition of ethical -- you could read through a list like this and pick out the products you agree with, and then ask yourself, "why do I agree or disagree with them?" That would be great. But OP themselves is under no obligation in this context to justify their decisions to anyone. Their opinion could be, "ethical software has to be written in Lisp." They're here to help you narrow down the software you know, and to find new software. That's it. Curation is not consensus. This is the equivalent of showing up on an Open Source project and forcing the maintainer to justify their choice in testing libraries. The software is on the list because OP decided to put it there, and because OP is the one that made the list. In the context of this specific list, OP is God. If you think their definition is too broad or ill-defined, make another list with a more narrow one.

samirillian 7y ago

Damn, nothing like scrolling that forum to remind you of one simple fact: _there can be no ethical consumption under capitalism_. Though I still love the list, haha.

O1111OOO 7y ago

> it's an imperfect mix ... others interested in this topic will get involved with criticism ans suggestions here on on our forum... It's a great start! Lots of programs and services I wasn't aware existed. There are some services I'm familiar with that I don't think belong on the list (given my own interpretation of ethical as it relates to modern computing) and am happy to see that suggestions are welcomed via the community forums. Surprised & delighted to see sections like Organizations, Magazines and Newsletters, Books and even Films - since most similar lists focus on applications instead of voices. It's these extra sections that really highlight and bring together the larger community concerned with these issues and helps open my eyes to other issues that don't normally penetrate my bubble of news. I can see most of these sections growing to include many more sites. The only immediate suggestion - short of separating the sections into their own pages - is a "detailed" list view to help make the information more manageable.