Replying to @rauschma@fosstodon.org
@rauschma Dutch

Technicus en taalliefhebber. Met deugen is niets mis. Kom bij mij niet aan met desinformatie.
Replying to @rauschma@fosstodon.org
@rauschma Dutch
Replying to @prism@infosec.exchange
@prism @grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
That the intended use of the pervert glasses that META sells constitutes, in general, a gross violation of people's privacy, even if the company pretends it's just a harmless, fun product, and that even META's own employees are painfully aware of that, when confronted with someone using it in their presence.
Replying to @grayrattus@mastodon.social
@grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
Je reden om die vergelijking te maken is dat je aanneemt dat ik het net zo verkeerd vind als jij om Amazon-employees aan te spreken op het morele aspect van hun werk voor Amazon?
🤭
Replying to @grayrattus@mastodon.social
@grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
You mean *in your opinion* it is harassment and not funny.
I think that, to the extent that it can be considered harassment, it is not undeserved, since those people work for META, and moreover I find the videoclip both enlightening and funny.
@ck0 @grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
You mean: given this faulty logic? I suppose so 🤔
Replying to @grayrattus@mastodon.social
@grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
What do you mean "harass them"
The guy simply uses the product that their employer markets to the public, within their employer's guidelines for it.
Do you somehow suggest that this is not perfectly all right?
Replying to @grayrattus@mastodon.social
@grayrattus @Roelmaalderink @bitsoffreedom
They work for META, fully knowing what kind of company it is they work for, don't they? "Working for money" doesn't mean they are not complicit.