|
Top-level
 @r000t @tinker oh, what a fun "gotcha" question. Except it's not. Facebook using any of these is also bad, because a company like Facebook shouldn't exist at all. Facebook couldn't have existed without these protocols but once they got to a dominant position they used their capital and political power to do tremendous harm and push out other entities who used the same open protocols. Look into their whole "free basics" program and how that fucked up some countries' political landscape. 3 comments
@r000t so, you're ok with anything as long as it's legal and "by the rules" then. maybe take a history class to see why this is a shitty philosophy. @esther If a company is causing serious human pain and suffering, if a company is breaking antitrust laws, if a company is is doing a colonialism or whatever, that's got literally nothing to do with open standards. It's like saying Norfolk Southern using the same rail guage as everyone else caused the palastine spill. |
Gregory's Server
@esther
"Open standards for all, except those I do not like" is a pretty spicy take.
If you had to write an RFC for when an entity is no longer allowed to participate in the same protocols as the rest of us, how would you draw those lines and set those definitions? This is an RFC, there cannot be any subjectivity. I'm looking for things like user counts and dollar amounts. Things that are quantifiable.
@tinker