3 ms·
Would you use anything that was only 16% effective for its claimed purpose? “Tylenol stops headaches in 16% of people” - it’s huge, right? That’s millions of p
by loloquwowndueo 8mo ago
Would you use anything that was only 16% effective for its claimed purpose?
“Tylenol stops headaches in 16% of people” - it’s huge, right? That’s millions of people we’re talking about.
Would you use it?
- mock-possum 8mo agoIdk why not? What’re the side effects?
- HeatrayEnjoyer 8mo agoCountless medications have <16% efficacy rate.
- NekkoDroid 8mo agoIf the other options would just straight up kill innocent bystanders (e.g. false positives for legit shops) I think that is a tradeoff I am willing to make.
- asadotzler 8mo ago99% of users don't even know they're being protected. There's no promise except "we work to make browsing safer" and cutting even 5% of malicious sites from a user's experience is an unmitigated win for that user at the low false positive rate Safe Browsing offers.
- notepad0x90 8mo agothat doesn't make a difference, they're still being protected. 99% of users don't know that defender saved their lives multiple times from being destroyed either. Same with spam filters, app store rejections,etc.. I don't get why there is such a lack of critical thinking on this topic here.
- notepad0x90 8mo agoYou don't have to use tylenol, just like GSB. Since we're picking random analogies, I think bankruptcy and or violent crime are close to what this is stopping. I'd say if it stops just one person from losing their life's savings, suffering physical harm, or psychological trauma, yeah, your blog being on GSB is worth it.