
I was wrong about Google and Facebook: there’s nothing wrong with them - bellinom
https://ar.al/2019/01/11/i-was-wrong-about-google-and-facebook-theres-nothing-wrong-with-them-so-say-we-all/
======
libeclipse
Comment from a Mozilla developer:

 _I enjoyed this, well done! I’m just speaking for myself (but I know many of
my colleagues agree) when I say that I don’t feel great about the source of
our revenue. That being said, developing a rendering engine is very expensive
(apparently even too expensive for Microsoft) and I’m not sure what the
alternative is. Ironically, every time we do try to diversify (pocket,
directory tiles, snippets etc), there is an even bigger backlash than the one
about Google._

::
[https://lobste.rs/s/b6jkt4/i_was_wrong_about_google_facebook...](https://lobste.rs/s/b6jkt4/i_was_wrong_about_google_facebook_theres#c_mlem5e)

------
vertline3
He's like Cassandra, fore-telling, but no one is listening. Hard to fight
against a mountain.

I suppose Google and the rest would be the trojan horse?

~~~
phoe-krk
Except it's already been welcomed into Troy ages ago and the Greeks have been
spilling out of it for a long time.

------
humanetech
This really shows the power of money, size and market dominance, and on the
consumer side of course the power of the business model of providing 'free'
products and services. Convenience, network effects, FOMO, and very little
awareness of what the dangers and capabilities of progressing surveillance
capitalism now and in the future are, or the impact of (big) tech on society.

There are hopeful trends, but it is a David against Goliath fight, going back
and forth and really slowly.

------
humanetech
Reference to Mastodon discussion on the article:
[https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/101399355594255147](https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/101399355594255147)

------
F-0X
I don't find his arguments convincing at all. The appearance of supporting
privacy is not mutually exclusive with invasive behaviour internally, and
records - even if supposedly kept private - is still potentially vulnerable to
being hacked/leaked. The problem is they collect data to sell as this is
literally their business, while true privacy is only achieved when personal
data is not collected.

~~~
libeclipse
Um

The appearance of supporting privacy may not be mutually exclusive with openly
invasive behavior, but actually supporting privacy is. I don't see the point
you're trying to make but it seems as though your stance is that it's OK for X
to _appear_ to support privacy while actually invading it??

"True privacy" isn't the concern here. Data breaches and hacks are a security
issue, this is an ethical one.

