7 ms·
As a technical solution to a social problem this has at least two downsides. It puts the cost on the consumer and it's a battle fought on unfavorable terms. I
by praptak 6y ago
As a technical solution to a social problem this has at least two downsides. It puts the cost on the consumer and it's a battle fought on unfavorable terms.
I can easily imagine that it will be harder for you to get the stuff repaired/supported, as in "I cannot see your dishwasher in our system and it's your problem".
I'm not saying you should not do that, I'm saying that it has little power compared to political action.
- SuoDuanDao 6y agoI believe it was Nato's invasion of Kosovo that I last believed political action has power.
- jeegsy 6y agoIt really sucks that you are correct.
- praptak 6y agoWe don't have to invade anyone to get privacy protection. Regulation like GDPR is sufficient.
- mschuster91 6y agoRegulation is worth only as much as its enforcement, and ... not all EU countries are up to that challenge. Just look at how lax the enforcement against Facebook is.
- praptak 6y agoThis doesn't counter the point that political action beats private countermeasures.
- SuoDuanDao 6y agoI wish I understood how Europe blunted the political power of large business lobbies to such a larger degree than the rest of the capitalist world. I wonder whether a key factor is the British use of crown corporations in expanding its empire and the legacy that left in the English speaking world. In any case, I suppose GDPR is a hopeful sign, but here in NorAm it actually seems more plausible to become an oligarch first and then make one's political wishes known then than to have any kind of political impact as a middle-class citizen.
- smoe 6y agoI reckon part of it is that the US and other colonies were basically sandboxes where (pre-)capitalist ideas could be build from scratch and deeply enrgained in the collective mindset over time. In Europe it had to be established over a much larger population (or at least one were you have to hold back to a degree with supression) and capitalism faced much more competition and backslash from the people right from the start and resulted in more of a batchwork of different ideas. At least anecdotally, when I talk to an average European vs US American, what e.g. their views about what restrictions for businesses are acceptable or even desirable, I get very different answers.
- atq2119 6y agoI'm sure that's part of it. Another hypothesis I like is that the US was populated to a significant extent by people who, when faced with problems at home, didn't stay and fight to fix them but instead preferred to leave. In addition to migration patterns that selected implicitly for such folk, this happened internally to the US as part of the movement to colonize ever further west. Now, there hasn't been anywhere else left to go for a while, but society hasn't really internalised this yet.
- captainredbeard 6y agoIn Europe, the common man accepts more social control over his life than the American common man, likely due to the feudal history of the Old World. Looking at median purchasing power and social mobility in France / Germany / Italy, I would argue they are still serfs, modified only by a lack of knowledge of their own slavery.
- wing-_-nuts 6y ago>I would argue they are still serfs, modified only by a lack of knowledge of their own slavery. I'm going to need you to expand on this point.
- captainredbeard 6y ago
- Chris2048 6y agoCan't you grant explicit pass-throughs though?
- 411111111111111 6y agoThe grand parent was talking about a faraday cage build into the house. That only stops wireless communication so I'm guessing he's talking about devices that use the mobile network to phone home. So no, it's not possible to let some things through. Not even your phone will get a connection. (Besides the ones that originate inside the house, like wlan)