Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>> The free market exists because it does a better job than any other system at giving consumers what they want.

> Nobody wants this!

OK, well if you don't believe in the free market then sure.

Good luck seeing how well state ownership manages the economy and if it does a better job at delivering the software features you want, or even of putting food on your table. Because the entire history of the twentieth century says you're not going to like it.



"regulating corporate overreach = state ownership"

Huh.

Your argument boils down to "it is wrong for people to defend themselves from corporations", but the cases you're making are incoherent. It seems like you believe this but don't know why you believe it and you're making up gibberish to defend it. I'd suggest you stop and analyze why you believe this--like what you really think will happen, and why you really think people do not have a right to defend themselves. Personally I can think of no situation where it is moral to say: people should not defend themselves. The concept seems absurd. To me all of human history is evidence that people do, always, have a right to defend themselves, and much evil has been perpetrated by the notion that they should sit down endure abuses instead.


No, you seem to not be reading what I'm saying. Please don't call it "incoherent" or "gibberish" just because you don't agree. That's completely inappropriate.

We're talking about a UX choice and you're talking about people "defending themselves" as opposed to "enduring abuses" coming from "much evil"?

The justification you're proposing is the same one that censors free speech, because people want to defend themselves from certain ideas, or things they just don't "like".

There's no harm here. Nobody's attacking you. You're not being abused. We're talking about a software feature you think is inconvenient that it takes up space on your screen.

I think companies should have the freedom to design products the they want, as long as it's not causing harm. Which in this case, it's not. You just don't like it. But that's not harm. If you don't like it, don't use it. Same as if you don't like a book, don't read it.

Rights and freedoms exist for a good reason. They're not absolute because they can conflict with each other, but in this case there's zero conflict. There's no justification for the government to start dictating Google's UX in this case.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: