4 ms·
The 'general victim blaming' feels weird in contexts when there are at least three parties involved (MS, Google, End-Users + X)(NATO, Ukraine, Russia). And how
by arendtio 3y ago
The 'general victim blaming' feels weird in contexts when there are at least three parties involved (MS, Google, End-Users + X)(NATO, Ukraine, Russia).
And how would you call it, when you compare a technological detail like the default setting of a HTTP header with a war where thousands of humans die? Hyperbole? Metaphorical exaggeration?
I think that is not a good base for a constructive discussion.
- Yizahi 3y agoA literal cartel or corporations expected to prey on the individual humans betting on the gaps in our psychology. A different corporation has bridged these gaps simply by saying out loud what individual humans actually want, working as a simple re-transmitter of human thoughts. And cartel said that "oh, since we can't win easily now, then you are at fault now" (and not the cartel who blackmailed the world in the first place). Same happened with Ruzzia. They wanted an easy win (to re-capture everything up to west Berlin again), and because of their blaickmail were quickly denied most of those easy wins, when their prey has hidden under NATO protection. They finally tried to capture whatever remained and when encountering resistance they blamed NATO. Basically every powerful sociopath, be is Ruzzia or ad-tech corpo, want to have absolute freedom of taking what they want. And any attempt to deny them something is considered a fault of the defending party.