Google Tries to Defend Its Web Environment Integrity as Critics Slam It as Dangerous

ruffsl@programming.dev to Programming@programming.dev – 776 points –
Google Tries to Defend Its Web Environment Integrity as Critics Slam It as Dangerous
techreport.com

Attacks and doxing make me personally MORE likely to support stronger safety features in chromium, as such acts increase my suspicion that there is significant intimidation from criminals who are afraid this feature will disrupt their illegal and/or unethical businesses, and I don't give in to criminals or bullies

Kick a puppy
Get attacked for kicking a puppy
"These attacks make me MORE likely to keep kicking puppies, as I don't give in to intimidation from criminals and bullies that want healthy puppies for their nefarious ends."

88

You are viewing a single comment

Kick a puppy

If you have to resort to false equivalences like these, you're not really making the anti-WEI crowd look good.


*Edit: * There's some massive misunderstanding about my comment.

I called it a false equivalency because it's comparing both the measures ("stronger safety") and the thing is supposed to prevent (doxing and bullying) to puppy kicking.

That's just emotional manipulation done badly. We all call it out when politicians use pedophiles to warrant Internet surveillance, and now apply it ourselves? I don't know about you, but when I see bad reasoning, I'll call it out. Even if it's done by "my side".

Analogies are inherently false equivalences.

It's illustrating the problem with the argument, not equating DRM technology with puppy kicking.

Though, for the record, this is one of the few situations where humanity would have been better off if Google had simply paid their web engineers to go out into the world and kick animals all day long instead.

Both support stronger safety features in chromium and criminals and bullies got equated to kicking puppies. That's why it's a shoddy attempt at illustrating their reasoning.

I think the comment that the_lego is replying to also highlights the false equivalency of calling the anti-WEI crowd as criminals, as was not a good look for Google.

They have apologized for using the word criminals & bullies in a broader context and I appreciate that. However, the initial part of the comment is very telling of how they view those who oppose.

That is an analogy.

The analogy being, do something objectively bad, get called out for it, double down because you don't like getting called out for it.

No one is equivocating anti-wei people to puppies.

There's some massive misunderstanding about my comment.

I called it a false equivalency because it's comparing both the measures ("stronger safety") and the thing is supposed to prevent (doxing and bullying) to puppy kicking.

That's just emotional manipulation done badly. We all call it out when politicians use pedophiles to warrant Internet surveillance, and now apply it ourselves? I don't know about you, but when I see bad reasoning, I'll call it out. Even if it's done by "my side".

No, it was not a comparison, it was an ANALOGY.

"A relationship of resemblance or equivalence between two situations, people, or objects, especially when used as a basis for explanation or extrapolation."

The important word here is resemblance. This is an analogy showing a resemblance, not a comparison.

This is quite a bit worse than kicking a puppy. Of course, it's horrible when puppies get kicked but ultimately they will be on. This, on the other hand would be a major set back to humanity, potentially permanent as our rights and privacy are erroded day by day.