Re:Google's software mistreats or harms the user
by tripzilch on Wednesday August 21, 2019 @08:12AM
(#20756556)
removing malware is good, so this method of bypassing normal authentication is good.
parental controls are good (?), so this functionality to suppress what-we-define-as-objectionable content is good.
autocomplete is good, so this keylogger is good.
Google Assistent is good (?), so having it just pop up unprompted and just start recording is good (It managed to record me a few times, even though I have zero interest in voice controlling my phone--I have NO idea what triggered it, so yeah that's malware).
Re:Google's software mistreats or harms the user
by leshow on Wednesday August 21, 2019 @11:38AM
(#20758232)
I'm not making a value judgment about anything, so that particular 'fallacy' doesn't apply. Good arguments don't just call things fallacies and leave it at that. Besides, the existence of a fallacy in an argument doesn't necessarily make it wrong; it's called the 'fallacy fallacy'.
Was Martin Luther King a criminal? A criminal is someone who breaks the law, and King knowingly broke a law against peacefully protesting against segregation, so yes.
Is it sexist to only hire women for a lingerie ad? Discrimination on the basis of sex is sexist, so yes.
Is it murder for a doctor to euthanize someone who wishes to die, even if it's not allowed in their area? Murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another, so yes.
But for all these things, if you just describe them as "criminals", "sexists", and "murderers", you're saying "we agree x is bad, y is an example of x, so y is bad", even if the reason x is bad doesn't really apply to y.