4 ms·

Feedback: I was one of the downvoters. I didn't downvote you because you were "criticizing" Google. I downvoted you because your points were non sensical, infla

Feedback: I was one of the downvoters. I didn't downvote you because you were "criticizing" Google. I downvoted you because your points were non sensical, inflammatory and irrelevant to the discussion. I have no ties to Google, I don't live in the US, I'll never work in a FAANG and in fact I dislike Google likely as much as you do.

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
Thanks for replying here then! :) Well, see, that's interesting, because even if I had known you would consider what I would say as "inflammatory" before I wrote it, I would have brushed that off because: Google is not only inflammatory as well but actual full blown cancer on our society, isn't it? They are absorbing insane amounts of control over what humans consider as the truth. They willingly coax users into actually building a database on how they browse the web - complete surveillance. They also basically own root access on a large percentage of surveillance devices which almost everyone has in their pocket. So perhaps "inflammatory" isn't the 100% perfect word, but Google certainly is something worse than "inflammatory". Hence my threshold for stopping myself from bashing them is very high. I hope you can understand what I mean?
- napsterbr 5y ago
  I think I do understand. You see, Stallman would be downvoted to oblivion if he shared his thoughts here as well. At the end of the day, IMO what really matters is being true to what you believe, regardless of what others do. For instance, if you think it's dangerous to use Go because of its ties to Google, by all means don't use it and share it. I have the same thought regarding lots of Google services, although I disagree in this particular instance. I personally would also hate to be in an environment where everyone thinks like me (i.e. an echo chamber). I grow as a person (and professional) when I'm confronted with views I don't agree with or I had never thought of. And in that sense HN has been a great learning experience so far. As for your question, a less business-focused news aggregator I like to read is https://lobste.rs https://lobste.rs, lots of good stuff there.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
    Fair enough :) Thank you! I will have a look at the site! (And yes, I agree echo chambers are bad, I merely grant myself an exception in trying to filter corporate viewpoints out because they're basically everywhere in daily life so I really don't think I need to see any more of them to know their point of view.)
  - dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
    I think it might be a common preconception. Actually 95% of Stallman's views are very reasonable, progressive and coherent. The remaining 5% are related to his consideration of creating proprietary software as "immoral." And while I'm sure these would be heavily downvoted here as few people have the luxury of working on free software exclusively, I'm sure the remaining majority would have many upvotes.
eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
With regards to the "non-sensical" and "irrelevant": Well, when procuring physical product, the source of its raw materials is relevant as well, you wouldn't want rain forests to be chopped down for your wood - so why aren't the raw materials of software relevant when considering if you want to use it?

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago

Thanks for replying here then! :) Well, see, that's interesting, because even if I had known you would consider what I would say as "inflammatory" before I wrote it, I would have brushed that off because: Google is not only inflammatory as well but actual full blown cancer on our society, isn't it? They are absorbing insane amounts of control over what humans consider as the truth. They willingly coax users into actually building a database on how they browse the web - complete surveillance. They also basically own root access on a large percentage of surveillance devices which almost everyone has in their pocket. So perhaps "inflammatory" isn't the 100% perfect word, but Google certainly is something worse than "inflammatory". Hence my threshold for stopping myself from bashing them is very high. I hope you can understand what I mean?

napsterbr 5y ago
I think I do understand. You see, Stallman would be downvoted to oblivion if he shared his thoughts here as well. At the end of the day, IMO what really matters is being true to what you believe, regardless of what others do. For instance, if you think it's dangerous to use Go because of its ties to Google, by all means don't use it and share it. I have the same thought regarding lots of Google services, although I disagree in this particular instance. I personally would also hate to be in an environment where everyone thinks like me (i.e. an echo chamber). I grow as a person (and professional) when I'm confronted with views I don't agree with or I had never thought of. And in that sense HN has been a great learning experience so far. As for your question, a less business-focused news aggregator I like to read is https://lobste.rs https://lobste.rs, lots of good stuff there.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago
  Fair enough :) Thank you! I will have a look at the site! (And yes, I agree echo chambers are bad, I merely grant myself an exception in trying to filter corporate viewpoints out because they're basically everywhere in daily life so I really don't think I need to see any more of them to know their point of view.)
- dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
  I think it might be a common preconception. Actually 95% of Stallman's views are very reasonable, progressive and coherent. The remaining 5% are related to his consideration of creating proprietary software as "immoral." And while I'm sure these would be heavily downvoted here as few people have the luxury of working on free software exclusively, I'm sure the remaining majority would have many upvotes.

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 5y ago

With regards to the "non-sensical" and "irrelevant": Well, when procuring physical product, the source of its raw materials is relevant as well, you wouldn't want rain forests to be chopped down for your wood - so why aren't the raw materials of software relevant when considering if you want to use it?