3 ms·

"Wonderful, a tracking device that follows me around" "You already have a tracking device that follows you around." Thats not a change in subject, nor an accu

by basch 7y ago

"Wonderful, a tracking device that follows me around" "You already have a tracking device that follows you around." Thats not a change in subject, nor an accusation of guilt. It's not a whataboutism. You shouting whataboutism, and changing the subject to fallacies is more of a whataboutism.

okmokmz 7y ago
It absolutely is a whataboutism. I am talking about Amazon Echo glasses. If I chose to use a smartphone that negates all other privacy concerns in my life? By carrying a smartphone I'm not allowed to care about my privacy? It is a textbook definition of whataboutism. I bring up a privacy concern, and you say WHATABOUT YOUR SMARTPHONE edit: I see you added this to your comment "You shouting whataboutism, and changing the subject to fallacies is more of a whataboutism." Although you are clearly very confused, because whataboutism is a logical fallacy.... I'm not changing the subject I was directly referring to the whataboutism fallacy, or more formally tu quoque
- basch 7y ago
  > involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of, rather than refuting the truth of the accusation Thats not what just happened. "You accuser" didnt accuse you of being a privacy violation. Smart Phone was brought up as an EXAMPLE of having a microphone and camera in your pocket, connected to the internet. It wasnt a change in subject from tracking devices. >Although you are clearly very confused, because whataboutism is a logical fallacy.... I believe you are the confused one. You changed the subject to a fallacy discussion, by mentioning whataboutism. Its like changing the conversation to fruit by mentioning bananas. Obviously banana is a fruit. >By carrying a smartphone I'm not allowed to care about my privacy? to quote you "instead of just in the privacy of my own home." no one said you arent allowed to be concerned about privacy, but thats not what you said. the "hivemind" disagreed with your PREMISE that you arent currently tracked and that this product would suddenly create tracking ability that doesnt already exist. Its the "instead of just in my home" part people are taking issue with, because the "just in my home" reality doesnt exist.
  - okmokmz 7y ago
    >"Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument" He is arguing that I should not be concerned with the "Echo Frames" if I use a smartphone because, as he stated, "A phone has more surveillance capabilities than anything announced today." It is a clear example of a whataboutism, as anyone who has done any epistemological study can clearly see. You pulling out a single line of the article in an attempt to discredit my argument is also fallacious, but I'm not going to continue to argue with people who aren't actually interested in having a reasonable discussion. Have a nice day
    - basch 7y ago
      It might be a whataboutism IF a smart phone company accused alexa of being a privacy violation, and amazon responded and said "no you are."
- wvenable 7y ago
  > I am talking about Amazon Echo glasses. Which literally changes nothing. It's an item on your body with a microphone. So just like your phone, your headphones, etc. It's nothing even particularly new. Google glass, at least, had a camera that significantly changed the privacy equation. These change nothing.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

by basch 7y ago

okmokmz 7y ago

It absolutely is a whataboutism. I am talking about Amazon Echo glasses. If I chose to use a smartphone that negates all other privacy concerns in my life? By carrying a smartphone I'm not allowed to care about my privacy? It is a textbook definition of whataboutism. I bring up a privacy concern, and you say WHATABOUT YOUR SMARTPHONE edit: I see you added this to your comment "You shouting whataboutism, and changing the subject to fallacies is more of a whataboutism." Although you are clearly very confused, because whataboutism is a logical fallacy.... I'm not changing the subject I was directly referring to the whataboutism fallacy, or more formally tu quoque

basch 7y ago
> involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of, rather than refuting the truth of the accusation Thats not what just happened. "You accuser" didnt accuse you of being a privacy violation. Smart Phone was brought up as an EXAMPLE of having a microphone and camera in your pocket, connected to the internet. It wasnt a change in subject from tracking devices. >Although you are clearly very confused, because whataboutism is a logical fallacy.... I believe you are the confused one. You changed the subject to a fallacy discussion, by mentioning whataboutism. Its like changing the conversation to fruit by mentioning bananas. Obviously banana is a fruit. >By carrying a smartphone I'm not allowed to care about my privacy? to quote you "instead of just in the privacy of my own home." no one said you arent allowed to be concerned about privacy, but thats not what you said. the "hivemind" disagreed with your PREMISE that you arent currently tracked and that this product would suddenly create tracking ability that doesnt already exist. Its the "instead of just in my home" part people are taking issue with, because the "just in my home" reality doesnt exist.
- okmokmz 7y ago
  >"Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument" He is arguing that I should not be concerned with the "Echo Frames" if I use a smartphone because, as he stated, "A phone has more surveillance capabilities than anything announced today." It is a clear example of a whataboutism, as anyone who has done any epistemological study can clearly see. You pulling out a single line of the article in an attempt to discredit my argument is also fallacious, but I'm not going to continue to argue with people who aren't actually interested in having a reasonable discussion. Have a nice day
  - basch 7y ago
    It might be a whataboutism IF a smart phone company accused alexa of being a privacy violation, and amazon responded and said "no you are."
wvenable 7y ago
> I am talking about Amazon Echo glasses. Which literally changes nothing. It's an item on your body with a microphone. So just like your phone, your headphones, etc. It's nothing even particularly new. Google glass, at least, had a camera that significantly changed the privacy equation. These change nothing.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]