5 ms·

What is the basis of right/wrong in this value judgment and why is this basis correct and the others not?

hutzlibu 4y ago
It is wrong that they do not do, what the user who payed for it, asked it to do. A task it can do, but choose to do a different task, that is better in the intereet of the corporation. It is a quite harmles example, but it is zelling of the general state of things and where we are heading. If I buy a device I assume I own it. Thats how it should be. Not that I rent it and the rules to rent change all the time.
- farias0 4y ago
  Is it not reasonable to expect that the keyword "share" functions the same as the share button? I don't know the standards you have for the things you buy, but I find unacceptable that a thing I paid (handsomely) for twists my orders to share adverting to my contacts under my name, and part of the reason things are so bad is because at every valid criticism there are people defending these stuff as normal
rendall 4y ago
One could ask this same question of any terrible, unethical thing. The reasonable expectation is that a digital assistant will work for its user and not the corporation that sold it. The corporation is trading on this expectation to exploit its users.
- hnews_account_1 4y ago
  This is not a reasonable expectation for a digital assistant. At all. It is reasonable for a hacker to expect it. But the majority of the public doesn’t care that Apple tries to push Apple Music. If this was sold as a separate service however, maybe people would have other expectations.
- obarthelemy 4y ago
  Except Apple clearly owns its users, not the other way around. They get money from you for everything you do with their devices (music, vids, books, ads, even purchases of anything now), AND get money from the sellers to let them just talk to you. "If you can't freely do anything on the device you own, you're the one owned."

It is wrong that they do not do, what the user who payed for it, asked it to do. A task it can do, but choose to do a different task, that is better in the intereet of the corporation. It is a quite harmles example, but it is zelling of the general state of things and where we are heading. If I buy a device I assume I own it. Thats how it should be. Not that I rent it and the rules to rent change all the time.

farias0 4y ago
Is it not reasonable to expect that the keyword "share" functions the same as the share button? I don't know the standards you have for the things you buy, but I find unacceptable that a thing I paid (handsomely) for twists my orders to share adverting to my contacts under my name, and part of the reason things are so bad is because at every valid criticism there are people defending these stuff as normal

rendall 4y ago

One could ask this same question of any terrible, unethical thing. The reasonable expectation is that a digital assistant will work for its user and not the corporation that sold it. The corporation is trading on this expectation to exploit its users.

hnews_account_1 4y ago
This is not a reasonable expectation for a digital assistant. At all. It is reasonable for a hacker to expect it. But the majority of the public doesn’t care that Apple tries to push Apple Music. If this was sold as a separate service however, maybe people would have other expectations.
obarthelemy 4y ago
Except Apple clearly owns its users, not the other way around. They get money from you for everything you do with their devices (music, vids, books, ads, even purchases of anything now), AND get money from the sellers to let them just talk to you. "If you can't freely do anything on the device you own, you're the one owned."