3 ms·
This is a good message to get out, and I wish it were more likely to make it into the hands of people who wouldn't otherwise get the message. I applaud the eff
by JasonFruit 5y ago
This is a good message to get out, and I wish it were more likely to make it into the hands of people who wouldn't otherwise get the message. I applaud the effort.
I'm disappointed with a few things about it, though, because:
- It makes it sound like Scott McCloud did this, but he didn't
- It unfortunately includes a political viewpoint that is irrelevant to the message
- It omits context on a few points to make them sound worse than they are, which is completely unnecessary, because the message is devastating without them
When you're speaking truth about a powerful and deceptive entity, you have to be absolutely factual and focused, and this isn't quite there.
- Ourgon 5y agoThe first three sections are worth showing to those who stubbornly insist on either trusting that these companies (all of them) will not abuse their access to their data or insisting they don't care about what those companies know about them. Section four - the 'social psychologist' starts the introduction of some political slant ('muslim, LGBTQIA+, democrat' portrayed as 'vulnerable' who might not get a job/credit card/health insurance policy, terms like 'fat shaming'), section five is just littered with 'progressive' tropes where Trump == evil and BLM == good. This is both a shame as well as stupid, it severely limits the credibility and potential reach of what would otherwise be a non-partisan description of the practices of that data-hog farm named Alphabet. Scrap those sections and re-publish I'd say. If not, this is a lost cause, just more 'progressive' propaganda.