Have you heard of Signal? This is the same argument. Meta has made people think that it is indispensable. They are not, as soon as we all realize they are not indispensable.
Have you come across this substack: https://substack.com/home/post/p-212401946
It’s a blog post titled The Banality of Facebook’ Evil.
subtitled: Popular conceptions of ‘evil’ fall down when confronting systemic moral failure
"Mark Zuckerberg is an especially egregious example of a tech lord who has created untold misery around the world. And I’m not just talking about creating products specifically designed to addict children so they will compulsively use his social media products. Although that’s pretty bad in itself.
To really understand the depth of Meta’s depravity it helped me to read a ‘tell-all’ book by someone who once worked at the highest level of the company. I’m referring to Sarah Wynn-Williams’ book Careless People. "
The net effect of WhatsApp is the sum of each individual’s decision to use the app, or not. The app has not always existed, and it is my sincere hope that it will some day cease to be relevant. You appear to be making the “nothing I can do” argument for using a tool which has alternatives, which you and others are free to adopt. If you decide that there is nothing you can do, then Meta profits from your choice, and continues to do harm.
And yet, people still use FB, IG and What’Sap. I just don’t get it. Of course that’s why I’m here, and not there. smh
FB and IG, sure. WhatsApp is not that easy.
In Europe is almost like saying that you don’t have a phone number. 🙄
Have you heard of Signal? This is the same argument. Meta has made people think that it is indispensable. They are not, as soon as we all realize they are not indispensable.
I have and it’s my default and I try to contact people there… still… 90% of the people don’t have it
Have you come across this substack: https://substack.com/home/post/p-212401946 It’s a blog post titled The Banality of Facebook’ Evil. subtitled: Popular conceptions of ‘evil’ fall down when confronting systemic moral failure
"Mark Zuckerberg is an especially egregious example of a tech lord who has created untold misery around the world. And I’m not just talking about creating products specifically designed to addict children so they will compulsively use his social media products. Although that’s pretty bad in itself.
To really understand the depth of Meta’s depravity it helped me to read a ‘tell-all’ book by someone who once worked at the highest level of the company. I’m referring to Sarah Wynn-Williams’ book Careless People. "
Not sure how this relates to the net effect of WhatsApp.
Sure, I understand that Meta is not an example of morality but, like elections, it’s not something an individual in isolation can decide
The net effect of WhatsApp is the sum of each individual’s decision to use the app, or not. The app has not always existed, and it is my sincere hope that it will some day cease to be relevant. You appear to be making the “nothing I can do” argument for using a tool which has alternatives, which you and others are free to adopt. If you decide that there is nothing you can do, then Meta profits from your choice, and continues to do harm.