I find it funny that I often get defensive questions from Google and Facebook engineers about their technologies/organizations when I post initial pro-privacy comments on HN, but after being called out and explaining in more detail I never get a response. I guess there's no point for them to argue it further as they're aware of the negative impact, but have made a conscious decision to choose money over morals
You said they have constant breaches, then immediately recanted when asked for details. Your argument which got no reply was an idealogical argument which appears to be constructed to shut down debate (they shouldn't be trusted because you don't like them) as opposed to lead to a meaningful discussion. You even threw out the casual line about them not having poor security and breaches, invalidating your argument in the post they replied to.
In other words, they seemingly care about whether the technical argument has merits. Once it's clear that there's no technical substance and it moves on to your personal crusade against modern companies, people lose interest.
Disclaimer: I don't work anywhere near the companies in question
>You said they have constant breaches, then immediately recanted when asked for details
No, I didn't, go back and read again
>Your argument which got no reply was an idealogical argument which appears to be constructed to shut down debate
It wasn't meant to shut down debate. If he wants to argue the ethics of spying on people and using psychological tactics for financial gain I'd be more than happy to discuss
>You even threw out the casual line about them not having poor security and breaches, invalidating your argument in the post they replied to
Again, no I didn't. I never said google had poor security or breaches, and I clearly stated that was just a generic example I used which brings attention to the wrong things, as demonstrated by you focusing on "breaches" rather than the point I was really trying to make and elucidated in my reply.
>In other words, they seemingly care about whether the technical argument has merits. Once it's clear that there's no technical substance and it moves on to your personal crusade against modern companies, people lose interest.
That's the entire point, and why I regretted saying "breaches". You are focusing 100% on the wrong thing. The problem that I have is not a technical argument about whether or not breaches could occur
As the original person, this almost exactly. I can totally understand why someone might hold those opinions. I don't share them, and argument won't be productive. Litigating values doesn't get anywhere.
