this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
291 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
59374 readers
3392 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Welcome to the classic social media 100m dash. Become a popular dunk target on socials > get people to call such and such choice as a dealbreaker > stop doing such and such > it is now "not enough", or "they'll enshittify it later" or "a slippery slope".
Which fine, whatever. I'm not saying Meta are "good guys" (no corporation is, honestly). What I will say is a) that is not a particularly productive or functional way to engage with pretty much anything, especially when there is no comparable alternative to a product, and b) this is a remarkable incentive to NOT acknowledge criticism. I mean, if I'm Meta and I see this often, what is the incentive to not just force everybody to EULA away as much as possible? People will give me crap for it regardless, so I may as well get to sell some sweet, sweet data.
FWIW, I'm skeptical of the ability of Meta to turn around the VR market as a whole, I don't like many of their privacy and content moderation practices and I no longer use Facebook, Instagram or Threads. But hey, I do have a Whatsapp account because it's pretty much mandatory to exist in society, and I do have a Quest headset, which I agree is the best price to performance you can buy and works flawlessly with PC VR both wired and wirelessly.
how incredibly fucking dishonest. profit motive is more than enough incentive for them to continue to do what they've already been doing for close to two decades.
"don't boycott exceptionally shitty companies or you're responsible when they just get worse" is possibly the worst take i've seen so far on lemmy.
That would sure be a bad take. Let me know when somebody makes it.
In the meantime I continue to argue that if you boycott people on the basis of their reputation without reversing that stance when they reverse their behavior then you're not "boycotting" anything, you're just removing yourself from the pool of possible customers altogether.
My issue isn't with the notion of boycotting companies, my issue is with the moving of goalposts when the companies do cave to the pressure just to extend the online ragefest. I get that it'd be easier to argue with the imaginary opponent in your head, but if you want to argue with me instead I'd appreciate addressing the actual issue.
Okay, but what does any of that have to do with Meta?