Mine is that the useState hook is an actual plague on the entire React ecosystem. Regardless of your opinions of React, if you wanna use something then use it right.
Mine is that the useState hook is an actual plague on the entire React ecosystem. Regardless of your opinions of React, if you wanna use something then use it right.
A lot of what people hate about Windows 11 is 10 years too early, especially when it comes to use of web components as interface
The Internet was always going to end up like this, attempts at “small, tight-knit, communities” will only last for a few years at most
Google has done more for web standards than the open source community ever could
The next mobile OS should abandon apps
Even if you did truely own your games, you would still be unhappy
You don’t like personalised advertising not because it feels invasive, but because you’re scared of being predictable and\or manipulable.
I’d say a niche subset of people have legitimate complaints now that will be inevitably turn out to be worse for more people in that 10yr timeline.
Motivated Trailblazers -> Second Wave -> Everyone Else. You could try and gatekeep or segregate but yeah I think you’re right, if you open something up to everyone then you get… everyone lol.
Ultimately yes, but that’s a distinction without a difference imo. Being invasive wouldn’t bother anyone either if there is no follow-up action. Predictions leading to repercussions or manipulation is the follow-up action no one wants. If there were some magic button that assured me the data they gathered was strictly used (by them) to better sell me their product I’d just consider it the cost of the free internet. Nowadays though, there’s simply no telling where that data will end up or what it will be used for; businesses, data brokers, insurance companies, political think tanks, government agencies, etc. None of those entities were there for the original “transaction”, nor are they really even incentivized to keep my data private or secure. Hell, 99% of the time I don’t even know they exist, but I’m supposed to be ok with the whole setup because they flash a shiny widget at me every once in awhile?
I appreciate the properly spicy response to the prompt! This is a lot of unpopular opinions.
I’ll note the same technology that allows you to target individuals for legit products also enables you serve malvertising to seniors, or identify people seeking specific medical services like an abortion.
I’m totally with you that targeted ads and data collection are used maliciously. But I can’t stand those who think their civil liberties are violated because they searched for “Toasters” and The Internet thought they might like to buy a toaster.
Nah, personalized advertising is the slimy salesperson who pretends to be your best friend from back in high school. It’s acting like there’s a very close personal relationship using privileged information. If it were a human, it would be the creepiest and most uncomfortable conversation you could ever have.
No, I specifically don’t like targeted advertising because it’s invasive.
If it was an individual following you around learning what you do and what you like/want, you could charge them with stalking. But because it’s not just one person, it’s a multi-billion dollar company working for a privacy invading industry, it’s suddenly OK?
Go fuck yourself.
The stalker is trying to intimidate or harass me for their own personal ends. People are bad, companies are in for profit.
The company will try and sell me more toilet paper because they know I have diarrhea. The multimillion dollar corporation is spying on me to make line go up. The thing people actually get angry about is the predictive ad which feel like it removes their autonomy.
The thing people forget when they get an personalised ad is that they are not the main character. Their behaviour is similar to others and the in the end the feeling that actions, even benign ones, can be predicted gets people upset.
It’s like the guy today complaining that his TV is always listening to him. Yes, because Samsung can make a few cents for putting a Domino’s ad on the TV when the word pizza is said. Oh but that means someone could access hundreds of thousands of hours of recordings! Of people talking in front of their TV. Of Hundreds of thousands of people. Oh but someone could access the recordings of my voice, determine a close family member, make a voice clone and get them to give them money!
I dunno, romance scammers seem to do just fine and that even works on people with 50 year old TVs.
I prefer to refer to it as contributing to the PornHub Year in Review.
Negative, it is the farther reaching effects of this data-mining hellscape that bothers me.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/
It’s not a matter of my autonomy being removed, it’s a matter of privacy. Full stop. This is the very first time in human history where people’s lives aren’t private. Your attention is a commodity traded on the open market, whether you want to be or not. And that’s the part I have a problem with.
Today, it’s being too aggressive marketing to pregnant teens. Tomorrow, it’s your insurance company buying your advertising profile, analyzing your past shopping habits to determine that you’re at a high risk for Chron’s Disease, and jacking your rates up over it.
You said it yourself, the line must go up. It’s not just about charging fair prices for goods and services, it’s about separating people from as much money as possible, by any means necessary.
Data aggregation can be weaponized against you. How many times do you think people struggling to make ends meet get shown ads for predatory loans? Or gambling addicts getting shown sports betting ads?
In the days of AI chatbots, is this really a far fetched idea? Just pipe the data into an AI and tease anything useful you possibly can out of it. The computers handle the raw data processing, you just collect what comes out the other end.
After all, the line must go up.
Hey, I’ve seen this one and guess what, Domino’s would prefer you order again.
You mean, in 2012 a father opened her daughter’s mail and saw some suggested coupons. She had made several healthy decisions in regards to a situation she was in, it was her Dad invading her privacy that blew this up. Someone at target had noticed some sales correlations for particular vitamins. She knew she was pregnant.
Yes, and even with the barrage of ads I’ve seen today, I’ve been able to choose to come back to this thread to try and convince people that something that the boogeyman of data collection is actually too expensive to weaponise and there’s some people out there who will always be assholes and taking away this particular tool will not solve anything.
I can’t help but notice that you’ve picked industries that have always been predatory. Stopping data collection doesn’t magically increase harm reduction.
I don’t think you’ve ever been in a position to see data collection used for a good thing.
No, it’s the exact reason I brought it up, ElevenLabs is magic (except that one time) it’s also why, in the very next sentance I said that you’re far more likely to be got by a romance scam. It’s just makes more sense at scale.
I don’t know I’m pretty happy to have archival copies of all my games and other media nowadays. It’s a huge improvement knowing my library is never going to shrink or change unless I choose it.
Part of problem is that being able to keep a copy of a game indefinitely doesn’t mean you “own” it. You just have a (revokable) license to use it within the conditions of the license, as with almost all software you use and media you consume.
When companies say you don’t own games, they mean this: you’ve never owned games you bought.
And also nothing from that software agreement promises they’ll replace it if you damage the disk or if the console breaks. It is, and has always been in many ways, a loan.
Categories are hard and everyone began searching for settings.
Yes, web communities are always growing and changing. Can people let things change (sometimes for the worse) without always interpreting as some sort of personal attack? It’s exhausting.
Yes, true, but consortiums and defacto standards are the only way these things can exist in the first place.
I should have said it better, no 3rd party apps, just 3rd party inteegrations. You want WhatsApp? Cool. Add it to the “messages” app as an account. You want a calendar? Sure it’s got one. You want it to talk to a different calendar? Sure, what’s the ics address? You want your music player to support a weird file type? Sure, add a codec. You want an app that does something I haven’t thought of? Cool, make it a PWA.
Yes, preservation and backing up is important, but I’d rather just take on private equity. I don’t have time for live services anyway.
People spent the whole 90’s and most of 2000’s complaining that computers were being shoved onto them and they didn’t work. They’ve incrementally gotten better and now people hate that it does work.
When you’ve killed all the bad guys, and when it’s all perfect and just and fair, when you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you going to do with the people like you? The troublemakers. How are you going to protect your glorious revolution from the next one?
Google was a great company when they were an upstart that needed to create standards so they could compete with the likes of Microsoft and Apple. They pushed for standards, adopted them, and promoted others to do the same.
Today, they have weaponized standards to entrench their monopolistic positions. They pushed so many standards in CSS, Javascript, and other technologies that it’s impossible for a competing browser to emerge outside of Chrome, which they own, and Firefox, which… they also own in any way that matters. And they also leveraged their search monopoly to favor websites that adopted the standards they were trying to push in order to force the web to adopt the standards they wrote, and therefore, their own browser.
They helped create the open web. Then they claimed it as their own.
It’s a great example of how a group starts out being your friend, but then amasses all the power for itself and gets corrupted by it. They have not been our friends for over a decade now, and we can all see how bad it gets.
To offer what? Several browsers come to mind which have offered different ways to serve up the interface, but it’s actually great that the rendering engine is more or less the same. “Best viewed with Netscape” was not an ideal time.
Firefox keeps
championingcomplaining that there should be more competition through different rending engines, then refuses to make a case for why having multiple rendering engines is a good thing. It’s not like they are constantly going to W3C proposing new protocols or new ideas. Hell, I thought JXL was going to be the next battleground but they followed Google and dropped it. And then they drag their heels browser support for WebMIDI?I do not doubt that Google has been corrupted by power. Mainfest3 or the end of 3rd party cookies was not done out of kindness or a concern for privacy. But we did get QUIC. HTML5 Video actually happened. And the way Google gets distracted chasing novelties only to shut them down three years later means they will destoy themselves in the end.
It’s not a question of what other browsers would offer, that doesn’t really matter all that much. From Mozilla’s perspective, it has more to do with the fact that Firefox has to keep up with a behemoth that has several times the amount of money and resources that they have.
But for you and me, it’s something completely different, and much more ominous than whatever Mozilla’s issues are.
The truth is that, now that Chrome has monopolistic control over the web, they can make it into whatever they want it to be. And I frankly don’t want to find out what that is. Maybe it’s the return of AMP, maybe it’s more invasive DRM, maybe it’s forcing you to put your ID into the browser so they know who you are and can blacklist you from the web if they have a vendetta against you. Maybe it’s the fact that they won’t let you browse the web on a computer if it doesn’t have a locked bootloader and rootless access to the OS the same way Android does.
These may sound like crazy ideas today, but bear in mind that the hell we’re living today is the long term realization of the crazy ideas of a few decades ago. Why should we want to see what that’s like? Why shouldn’t we be trying whatever we can do to prevent it?