This is a public service announcement: by saying "IT is crap because users still buy it" you are effectively blaming the victim.

There is a huge information and resources asymmetry between large companies creating software and hardware, and regular person who just wants their Internet-connected device to, you know, not do harm. Companies effectively made a business model out of that asymmetry.

We need education and regulation to make IT not crap.

@switchingsocial
Even more tinfoil-hat sounding is the use of ultrasound for tracking, yet also real.

What I find at our community is that many people are really worried, but - just like with climate change, the environment - they are talking the talk, but not willing to walk the walk. Problems seem overwhelming, and this perception can lead to defeatism, and actively ignoring the problems ("I can't do anything. Let the big shots figure it out").
@rysiek

@rysiek
Yes, agree with article, and very much at play in tech world too. But now you see ppl putting blame at big corp and not changing themselves. Blame is shared by e.g. taking convenience of the supermarket. Eat less meat and you can afford to shop at eco-friendly local store.

In tech too ppl want to fight harms, but when it comes to action, they are busy, busy, busy .. using google, FB, etc. out of convenience. We must prepare an easy path for them to engage
@switchingsocial

@humanetech @rysiek @switchingsocial We cannot blame people for using the tools of surveillance capitalism as long as 99.99999% of all investment goes into surveillance capitalism. That’s victim blaming. It’s the same as telling people that they can solve climate change by altering their consumption habits while just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of all carbon emissions. We need systemic regulation of abusers and investment in alternatives.

@aral
Agree. Should've used different word: sharing responsibility. With climate change this is clearest. Ppl talk about the world going to shit, then jumping in the plane to their next holiday, buying gas guzzler, tropical wood furniture etc. Encouraging the willingness to really change personal lifestyle is really hard. Of course capitalism does what it can to make ppl mindless consumers.
@rysiek @switchingsocial

@aral
Imho, it is not victim blaming to point out their own responsibility, but the first step that involves is raising awareness.
@rysiek @switchingsocial

Follow

@aral

> It’s the same as telling people that they can solve climate change by altering their consumption habits ..

I think that is dangerous argument; a gliding scale. Sure, they cannot solve, but they can *help* solve in their own way. Saying their own small steps are insignificant risks ppl leaving the fight to higher levels, and the normal man to 'lean back and wait' for the outcome.
@rysiek @switchingsocial

@aral
The argument also scales. In Netherlands we now have political dealmaking on climate change goals, and you hear serious arguments being made like 'NL contribution is a drop in the ocean anyway. US and China should really do something, and what we do is symbolic'. Which is terrible to get individuals to participate positively.
@rysiek @switchingsocial

@humanetech @rysiek @switchingsocial Capitalism is expert at shifting blame to the consumer and creating niche markets that allow (usually the privileged among them) to either avoid certain core externalities or rinse their consciences (or do both) through further/alternative consumption without actually threatening the system itself.

“Don’t use Google” is very different to “we should tax Google like tobacco”. Much talk about former, we need more on latter.

@aral @switchingsocial @rysiek @humanetech Taxing Google like tobacco would be a good start, but I suspect Google is more harmful than tobacco ever was.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!