|
|
|
|
|
|
by core-questions
2377 days ago
|
|
|
Technology should not be inserting itself into the private lives of people and determining the values they can raise their children with. This is something parents should have as a tool. If you don't like it, tough; go raise your kids the way you want to. There's no reason why someone with traditional values shouldn't be afforded the ability to selectively block things they find obscene. |
|
|
That's why companies have to exercise moral taste when they do a blanket ban on moral obscenity, and that's precisely the kind of product that people mean to purchase -- curation and tastefulness. It's also why it's interesting for people to fight over this, because they're fighting over a policy of scale as opposed to what goes on in one single home.
And presumably this company would later be interested in dealing with schools and other big institutions, which means their product takes on yet another critical dimension, which is the re-allocation of responsibility for making morally tasteful decisions.
In both B2C and B2B, the refusal to exercise moral perspective, taste, and curation is missing the soul of the product. But of course not all areas of tech is for everyone; some people don't wish to work with advertising companies, and that's fine too, but advertising companies likewise make policies of scale and must exercise moral and political taste.