4 ms·

I don't think that's right. I feel people here are not generally anti-tech, but ask for tech that benefits users instead of exploiting them.

• astura 4y ago
  People on HN have a pretty bizzare definition of "exploiting users," IMO.
  • fsflover 4y ago
    Could you elaborate?
    • omniglottal 4y ago
      Not op, but in a capitalistic economy where transactions tend to be using legal tender, companies providing things for "free" where the (hidden) cost is submission to Big Brother... well, that's exploitative at the least, dystopic in reality. Your unawareness of this being a BIG issue to those who cannot even choose to pay money for a product which is only "sold" for the price of your privacy... is pretty obviously a result of exploitative marketting and a control of tge dialogue which supercedes any source without a narketting/PR department. Especially while we're now "sold" ephemeral licenses instead of permanent products, and most of these products are bits which cost <$0.001 to reproduce, yet cost more today than a hard-copy did in the past, and the lion's share of profit goes to investors, management, CEOs, and other people who not only cannot produce product, but actively handicap and reduce functionality of products to squeeze ever more profit from the now-choiceless consumers. Does that clarify what has been achingly obvious to many of us who see this writing on the wall?
      • fsflover 4y ago
        In my experience, this is actually the typical opinion of people on HN, and I agree and see nothing weird with it.