4 ms·
The issue is not being controlled by a Chinese company. The issue is they’ve adopted the “sell user data” profit model that is super popular in all of tech. Y
by olliej 3y ago
The issue is not being controlled by a Chinese company.
The issue is they’ve adopted the “sell user data” profit model that is super popular in all of tech.
You should not be complaining about opera because they’re owned by a Chinese company any more than you would complain about chrome being owned by a us company.
The complaint for both (and many other companies) should be the business model of selling user data is morally corrupt.
- kwhitefoot 3y agoHow do you propose that they generate enough income then?
- olliej 3y agoDevelop a revenue stream that doesn't depend on misleading people? Plenty of software exists that doesn't depend on violating user's privacy. Hell google's original Ad Words was built on putting ads relevant to content being read, but then they pulled a Boeing and reverse acquired DoubleClick so went all in spyware/"behavioral advertising". This obsession with selling out your users to make money is gross, and the absurd belief that that is the only path to income is absurd. Plenty of companies still exist and make money by selling products rather than users and the twisted belief that you can only make money by "giving away" your product (and then selling out your users) that you're exhibiting is just insane. It's especially laughable to point to a company like Opera (the modern one, not the original) which is just skinning chrome, and then say "they should be able to make a profit by selling out their users". If they are adding so little value, when the overwhelming majority of the work is done for free for them, that people don't want to actually pay for it, why should they make a profit? if their sales pitch involves misleading the consumers about what they are doing, why should they be making money?