I've spent a hot minute trying to summarise Mat Duggan and failing, so please forgive a link drop in service of not botching the cookie banner argument:
I hold values which lead to conflicting views and opinions, which i therefore hold lightly and attempt to balance. No action or inaction is a perfect solution to a wicked problem.
- yes, people should be free to do whatever they want with their computers
- yes, people should have the freedom to exercise their independent choices
- unfortunately, there is no such thing as independent choice (unless, maybe, you were already living as a hermit)
- it is ostrichism to pretend that zuckerberg (to use him as shorthand) has not unilaterally and unaccountably engineered society to his own ends
- society has shown considerable appetite to rein him (etc) in, for legitimate reasons
- i do not, generally, support banning harmful things when stakeholders exist who favour those things
- i also do not think that the existence of stakeholders who benefit should excuse all harm
- therefore, this ugly compromise is approximately no worse than the least bad course of action or inaction
Things are shit. We are in shit. For all of history, we have always been in some or other grade of shit. We can sometimes choose between different piles of shit, but "not being in shit" is not an option. I find horseshit less objectionable than catshit, and so do many others; so here we are, actively jumping into horseshit.
https://matduggan.com/you-know-gdpr-is-good-based-on-who-hat...
I hold values which lead to conflicting views and opinions, which i therefore hold lightly and attempt to balance. No action or inaction is a perfect solution to a wicked problem.
- yes, people should be free to do whatever they want with their computers - yes, people should have the freedom to exercise their independent choices - unfortunately, there is no such thing as independent choice (unless, maybe, you were already living as a hermit) - it is ostrichism to pretend that zuckerberg (to use him as shorthand) has not unilaterally and unaccountably engineered society to his own ends - society has shown considerable appetite to rein him (etc) in, for legitimate reasons - i do not, generally, support banning harmful things when stakeholders exist who favour those things - i also do not think that the existence of stakeholders who benefit should excuse all harm - therefore, this ugly compromise is approximately no worse than the least bad course of action or inaction
Things are shit. We are in shit. For all of history, we have always been in some or other grade of shit. We can sometimes choose between different piles of shit, but "not being in shit" is not an option. I find horseshit less objectionable than catshit, and so do many others; so here we are, actively jumping into horseshit.