Indeed. But how does that differ from the motivation of any other Web 2.0 site?
It isn't hypocritical of me to mow my lawn to avoid fines while still advocating for elimination of the grass ordinances in my city.
To directly address your point: the motivation of web 2.0 sites is to get a bunch of money by making the content hard to read without first looking at a bunch of ads, and futher to disallow a reading experience uninterrupted by adds every 30-60s. The web page in question did not show me any ads.
My question to you is: how do you not see the difference?
He mentioned this in the article.
I disagree with working a 5 day week too...I suppose I'd better call my boss.
It might not get the amplification that they author expected. But that would be pretty in keeping with the Web 1.0 ideals being extolled, right?
If we're gonna promote web 1.0, then we need to promote web 1.0 compatibility also.
Also the fact the author appears to work for Bank of America... hard to take seriously his complaints about big tech just wanting to make money, in light of that.
* "It was all about one thing… MONEY!"
* "Why all the tracking? Well, again it comes down to one thing…money."
* "If you’re more likely to click, they make more money."
* "As with social media, it’s all about money."
* "Do you know why, dear reader? You guessed it…MONEY!"
To me, this just seems like a ridiculous thing to harp on when the author works for a massive financial institution. Is BoA's motivation not all about money? Why would you expect big tech companies, or big companies in any industry, to be any different?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_America#Controversies
[2] https://www.americanbanker.com/news/ex-bank-of-america-emplo...