3 ms·

> calling server-side autocomplete on a field you explicitly are typing in strikes me as about as sensible and forthright as calling an Amazon text field that t

> calling server-side autocomplete on a field you explicitly are typing in strikes me as about as sensible and forthright as calling an Amazon text field that takes my credit card number a card skimmer Exactly, and waters down the impact of the termminology. If "card skimmer" is anything that can read a credit card, than the term is meaningless for security. If "keylogger" is anything connected to the web that responds to a keypress... GNU is risking turning into the boy who cried wolf here.

gregknicholson 7y ago
> GNU is risking turning into the boy who cried wolf here. As with a lot of the FSF's messaging, I think the substance of the message may be correct, but the way they convey it just isn't effective. If this is for a general audience(!), no-one was ever convinced by the 48th item in a list who wasn't already convinced by the 47th. You don't persuade people just by being right, and certainly not by banging on about the very many subtly-different ways in which you're right. Pick few strong examples and prosecute those decisively. If this is a resource for campaigners, set out the audience and intent before you start. Preface it with something like “Here are various ways that certain aspects of Google's software can be seen as indistinguishable from malware. They may be useful counterarguments if someone suggests Google's software is trustworthy.”
- c0vfefe 7y ago
  There's a lot to appreciate about Stallman, but as an ideologue, he's never going to prioritize a gentle & incremental articulation of his ideas. We could call it a failure to empathize, but you see ideologues all over undermining their communication by making it as distilled & radical as possible. But that's not what tends to convince other humans they're wrong about something.

3 ms·

> calling server-side autocomplete on a field you explicitly are typing in strikes me as about as sensible and forthright as calling an Amazon text field that t

by davvolun 7y ago

gregknicholson 7y ago
> GNU is risking turning into the boy who cried wolf here. As with a lot of the FSF's messaging, I think the substance of the message may be correct, but the way they convey it just isn't effective. If this is for a general audience(!), no-one was ever convinced by the 48th item in a list who wasn't already convinced by the 47th. You don't persuade people just by being right, and certainly not by banging on about the very many subtly-different ways in which you're right. Pick few strong examples and prosecute those decisively. If this is a resource for campaigners, set out the audience and intent before you start. Preface it with something like “Here are various ways that certain aspects of Google's software can be seen as indistinguishable from malware. They may be useful counterarguments if someone suggests Google's software is trustworthy.”
- c0vfefe 7y ago
  There's a lot to appreciate about Stallman, but as an ideologue, he's never going to prioritize a gentle & incremental articulation of his ideas. We could call it a failure to empathize, but you see ideologues all over undermining their communication by making it as distilled & radical as possible. But that's not what tends to convince other humans they're wrong about something.