[anotherevan]

Also ask them about how many bloody times prompts about upgrading have come up, again and again and again. People are not perfect robots that crunch data, fatigue sets in at some point, which is exactly what microsoft preyed on in this case. Crunching data is what we use computers for, or at least try to.

[Mithaldu]

Ok, then report "MS is using dark patterns", not "Windows is upgrading on its own and there was nothing we could do to stop it". Those are both very serious failure modes, and both need to be adressed, but by obscuring which one is actually occurring you're doing nobody a favor.

[anotherevan]

Blaming the victim is doing nobody a favour either.

The distinction between “windows is upgrading on its own and there was nothing I could to to stop it [once it started]” and “microsoft used a bunch of shifty tricks to fool me into pressing a button that supposedly gave my consent, and then there was nothing I could do to stop it” becomes pretty moot, pretty fast.

Yes, the latter is technically correct, and should be the main focus. But for the victims who are wondering what the fuck just happened, a snide, “did you read the dialogue before closing it?” isn’t helpful. It comes off as smug because because you consider yourself superior.

If there was more nuance to your original comment, you probably should have made it in the first place. Your one-liner only came across as snark.

[Mithaldu]

> The distinction between .... becomes pretty moot

I vehemently disagree, since by identifying the actual issue you can, instead of frightening other people into fearing an automatic upgrade at any time, inform them about what is actually happening and better prepare them to prevent the same happening to them.

That said, yes, my previous comment was snide snark. At that point it was all i had upon realizing how badly the whole discourse was fucked up towards not being useful to anyone.

[anotherevan]

> > The distinction between … becomes pretty moot

> I vehemently disagree, since by identifying the actual issue you can

I understand where you’re coming from. And I already agreed that what actually happened – the shifty practice to supposedly gain consent – should be the discussion. My entire sentence about the distinction is with regard to giving consent, which is what your original one-liner alluded to. Microsoft tricked people so they would have the excuse after the fact that you gave consent, when they really do no such thing.

So in most ways we probably agree on the actual issue – but your original one-liner came across as blaming the victim for being human – my reaction to it was to blame microsoft for intentional manipulation of human nature to achieve their objective, without the person’s consent, against the person’s desire, in a way that tries to make it look like their own fault.

If nothing else though, the snark comment prompted us both to elucidate our viewpoints and (I hope) find common ground.

[Mithaldu]

> common ground

If the common ground is that we're somehow in a situation where both Windows users, and MS are being harmed, and the only people benefiting are news websites who get clicks for sensationalist headlines that do nothing to help the users, then i think we've reached it. :)

:( vvvv

[anotherevan]

Oh well, I guess not, then. :-)