Thanks to Samantha Cole at 404 Media, we are now aware that Automattic plans to sell user data from Tumblr and WordPress.com (which is the host for my blog) for “AI” products. In respon…
The tech industry understands consent just fine, the corpos will ignore the idea however if it means less revenue and can’t have that because capitalism.
I’m giving the benefit of the doubt to every one of these shitty clickbait article authors about “tech industry” and “software engineering circles” that the authors aren’t dense and know random code monkeys aren’t evil or too stupid to figure out opt-in is more ethical, they just work for corps that have to make money because capitalism, but they post their stupid garbage anyway because it gets clicks.
Why would you discourage interesting, original journalism over such an obtuse nitpick?
They are clearly criticising the same capitalist structures that you are. They single out the tech industry because the article is about the misuse of tech, not because they think rank and file tech workers are deviants.
Frankly it comes off as fragile and dismissive, and if that’s what we’re doing we could have just stayed on reddit.
While the tone of the comment is dismissive, they have a point.
It’s not the engineers that are the problem, or even limited to the tech industry. Dark patterns are top-down business decisions, motivated by money.
It’s not that the “tech industry doesn’t understand consent,” but rather that greedy people do evil things. And software is just a low hanging fruit for that kind of business.
Software engineering has no culture - shared or otherwise. It’s just a job, you clock in, you clock out, it’s the same prison as anything else but with the comfort of WFH. The only maybe cultural aspect is that people refuse to unionize, but that’s a different issue and a result of material pressures (far too much demand for jobs gives uneven bargaining power).
Bezos, musk, gates et al were never seen as heroes by those who don’t idolize capitalists and corpos to begin with, and are still seen that way by the rest.
The future is indeed tech solutions and always has been, not an-prim nonsense and tech will indeed save us (and already has from every problem tackled thus far in humanity’s history, every disease etc.), but those tech solutions have to be aligned with humanity’s interests, and to do that you need to remove the exploitation incentive and the way you do that is by changing economic systems to communism or anarchism.
Idk I don’t find it very frustrating, it’s very clean cut in my opinion.
The corpos and gaffers ARE the tech industry. We all know that coders don’t make decisions like that, and the article does not blame them. I’m all for raising awareness of the problems with “opt-out” and fluid license agreements.
I try to fight some battles about ads, accessibility and an open web but I’m a failing don Chiosciotte; best I can actively do is test mainly for Firefox and make sure everything works properly there but for more business related decisions (see: ads, consent etc) there is little to nothing I can do
The tech industry understands consent just fine, the corpos will ignore the idea however if it means less revenue and can’t have that because capitalism.
I’m giving the benefit of the doubt to every one of these shitty clickbait article authors about “tech industry” and “software engineering circles” that the authors aren’t dense and know random code monkeys aren’t evil or too stupid to figure out opt-in is more ethical, they just work for corps that have to make money because capitalism, but they post their stupid garbage anyway because it gets clicks.
Don’t post it here.
Why would you discourage interesting, original journalism over such an obtuse nitpick?
They are clearly criticising the same capitalist structures that you are. They single out the tech industry because the article is about the misuse of tech, not because they think rank and file tech workers are deviants.
Frankly it comes off as fragile and dismissive, and if that’s what we’re doing we could have just stayed on reddit.
While the tone of the comment is dismissive, they have a point.
It’s not the engineers that are the problem, or even limited to the tech industry. Dark patterns are top-down business decisions, motivated by money.
It’s not that the “tech industry doesn’t understand consent,” but rather that greedy people do evil things. And software is just a low hanging fruit for that kind of business.
deleted by creator
Software engineering has no culture - shared or otherwise. It’s just a job, you clock in, you clock out, it’s the same prison as anything else but with the comfort of WFH. The only maybe cultural aspect is that people refuse to unionize, but that’s a different issue and a result of material pressures (far too much demand for jobs gives uneven bargaining power).
Bezos, musk, gates et al were never seen as heroes by those who don’t idolize capitalists and corpos to begin with, and are still seen that way by the rest.
The future is indeed tech solutions and always has been, not an-prim nonsense and tech will indeed save us (and already has from every problem tackled thus far in humanity’s history, every disease etc.), but those tech solutions have to be aligned with humanity’s interests, and to do that you need to remove the exploitation incentive and the way you do that is by changing economic systems to communism or anarchism.
Idk I don’t find it very frustrating, it’s very clean cut in my opinion.
deleted by creator
Too much :(
The corpos and gaffers ARE the tech industry. We all know that coders don’t make decisions like that, and the article does not blame them. I’m all for raising awareness of the problems with “opt-out” and fluid license agreements.
The article says “software engineering circles” so yes it does mean coders absolutely and primarily.
I try to fight some battles about ads, accessibility and an open web but I’m a failing don Chiosciotte; best I can actively do is test mainly for Firefox and make sure everything works properly there but for more business related decisions (see: ads, consent etc) there is little to nothing I can do