3 ms·

When confronted with the situation, neutrality isn't possible: you either stand up for your users or you help the Government to censor. There's only so much yo

by gasull 16y ago

When confronted with the situation, neutrality isn't possible: you either stand up for your users or you help the Government to censor. There's only so much you can avoid taking sides on.

nhangen 16y ago
Not all users are created equal. We know this, just as we know that the customer is not always right. None of this is black and white, there is gray across the board. These are complex decisions being made by complex businesses...why does no single company deserve the benefit of the doubt?
- intended 16y ago
  They all do. Everyone deserves it, and it has been given many times. But many companies have broken that trust, repeatedly and gotten away with murder. I don't think its about the benefit of doubt anymore. I think we have to recognize that the groups on the other side of the power equation are implacable and do not have constraints stopping them from harming you. They have the power to take over your life and do not have any oversight. Heck I would say that they have evolved to game the system and learnt how to be the best at it. The original system was not about "the constitution" or freedom, liberty, fraternity or whatever ideal we can point to. It was about distributing power evenly and having checks and balances in the most enlightened way possible. That power equation IS out of whack, and it needs to be brought back into balance. At what point do you stop staring at the minute details and say - Crap things are messed up. When was the last time you heard a company take the long view about society? If corporations don't care because they have a need to make money, if the rule makers have been corrupted and the average user is irrelevant, if the impartiality of the referees/judges is being removed, then who is there to ensure the system works? As someone pointed out - "I mean, do we have to wait until they grope us at checkpoints? Checked. Until they take websites down without trial? Checked. Until they start accusing journalist of espionage? Checked. Until they illegally tape the Internet? Checked." Heck you have to get pissed off at some point before you do something about it. Its likely that the point has been passed.

by gasull 16y ago

When confronted with the situation, neutrality isn't possible: you either stand up for your users or you help the Government to censor. There's only so much you can avoid taking sides on.

nhangen 16y ago

Not all users are created equal. We know this, just as we know that the customer is not always right. None of this is black and white, there is gray across the board. These are complex decisions being made by complex businesses...why does no single company deserve the benefit of the doubt?

intended 16y ago
They all do. Everyone deserves it, and it has been given many times. But many companies have broken that trust, repeatedly and gotten away with murder. I don't think its about the benefit of doubt anymore. I think we have to recognize that the groups on the other side of the power equation are implacable and do not have constraints stopping them from harming you. They have the power to take over your life and do not have any oversight. Heck I would say that they have evolved to game the system and learnt how to be the best at it. The original system was not about "the constitution" or freedom, liberty, fraternity or whatever ideal we can point to. It was about distributing power evenly and having checks and balances in the most enlightened way possible. That power equation IS out of whack, and it needs to be brought back into balance. At what point do you stop staring at the minute details and say - Crap things are messed up. When was the last time you heard a company take the long view about society? If corporations don't care because they have a need to make money, if the rule makers have been corrupted and the average user is irrelevant, if the impartiality of the referees/judges is being removed, then who is there to ensure the system works? As someone pointed out - "I mean, do we have to wait until they grope us at checkpoints? Checked. Until they take websites down without trial? Checked. Until they start accusing journalist of espionage? Checked. Until they illegally tape the Internet? Checked." Heck you have to get pissed off at some point before you do something about it. Its likely that the point has been passed.