5 ms·
I'm with the dad. Not necessarily for the specific choices but for making a choice. Author should have waited another 10 years because this is a shallow and sti
by rdiddly 6y ago
I'm with the dad. Not necessarily for the specific choices but for making a choice. Author should have waited another 10 years because this is a shallow and still-immature perspective that underappreciates her dad's principle and integrity. Why should a company that demonstrably sucks for you, continue to get your money? (So your teenage daughter can be like the cool kids?) It's called voting with your wallet, and a lot of problems would just vanish if more people did it. If you keep rewarding a company, they assume they're doing it right. And you have this entity in your life that is bullshit, and if you accumulate enough of those, YOU become bullshit.
Edits/Addenda:
Live your truth. (Once you have your own money that is, because beggars can't be choosers.)
"Hmm I can't help but notice that the people this company hired specifically to talk to me are rude AF and my very first contact with them included statements that were verifiably lies." [0]
"Hmm this company takes advantage of me by collecting & selling my personal data, some of which I consider private and might not have consented to if I had read the privacy policy." [1]
"Hmm this company does provide the service I want from them, but I've heard they treat their female & ethnic-minority employees like shit, don't consider a lot of their workers employees at all, and they seem to break local laws a lot." [2]
"Hmm this registrar uses deceptive phraseology in its communications, e.g. referring to an expired domain that I intentionally didn't renew and on which I owe nothing, as an 'overdue invoice.'" [3]
[0] Comcast
[1] Facebook
[2] Uber
[3] Namecheap
A person for whom principles aren't important, lives with and financially supports things like this. It's not necessarily weak, but it doesn't take any particular strength of character either. Only a tolerance for cognitive dissonance. Someone for whom principles are more important, gets out of that relationship and finds another. Someone for whom principles are paramount, might just do without that product or service entirely, if unable to find a satisfactory provider of it.
- RandoHolmes 6y agoagree 100% and made roughly the same point in a reply to someone else. The father was accused of fanboyism, but my takeaway from the article is just that the father had high expectations and when those expectations weren't met they refused to continue giving them money. If more people were like this, these companies would be better.
- trabant00 6y ago100 % with you. I mean why would you give money to companies that treat you like a dummy, won't allow you to tinker with your computer, ask for double the money compared to build it yourself, etc. It might be just me getting old but I don't understand the current consumers who don't really demand anything for their money. Is nothing important to you? Do you just buy what they tell you to in marketing and PR?
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoIt might be just me getting old but I don't understand the current consumers who don't really demand anything for their money. Is nothing important to you? Do you just buy what they tell you to in marketing and PR? They just value different things to you. It doesn't mean they are a gullible idiot. I don't understand why that is so difficult for people to recognise.
- trabant00 6y agoWhat are those things? I care about price, reliability, ease of maintenance, freedom to modify, etc. What do you/they care about?
- franga2000 6y agoI didn't see the article nearly as negative as you did. The last paragraph actually sounded extremely positive: > Even though he was a pain in the butt about his preferences [...], my dad did right by me by. Instead of just putting me in front of a computer as a kid, he showed me how to make it my own.