I understand your sentiment and am even inclined to agree with it. but I have been there before just too many times. there is always a momentum for such a discu

I understand your sentiment and am even inclined to agree with it. but I have been there before just too many times. there is always a momentum for such a discussion as long as the product hasn't yet fully saturated the market. that said, even if that window of opportunity is utilized by critics (e.g. engineers and early adopters) there still is a high risk that this type of behavior (by Zoom) gets normalized. it's the same old pattern: we create small hacks and workarounds which nobody except a minority knows or cares about - eventually they'll release features which we're no longer able to workaround - by then employers consider it as a "critical software to do business" - by which any discussions about flaws have become impossible. (too big too fail) if we don't speak up now and give them FIRE, then the covid19 crisis will have been the reason why another surveillance technology gets normalized. working under tracking a la "upwork.com" - where marketeers decide how to screen capture and key-log all input is somehow normal. note: I'm not attacking your point and didn't think you agree to Zoom's way of doing things. I just feel really strongly about not giving them any benefit of the doubt because they have already got a history of abusing trust. my comment in the sibling thread mentions why this literally can't be fixed with a browser add-on: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22662212 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22662212 again: not an attack on your comment, not attacking OP's work either. and we probably agree on more than we disagree here by what I can tell