|
|
|
|
|
by gfxgirl
2218 days ago
|
|
I'm just as upset by bloat and tracking as well but the criticism seem a little off for some reason I can't quite put my finger on. I go to a restaurant and I can't just walk into the kitchen and grab a plate of food. Nor can I walk into the refrigerator, grab some supplied, and then walk over to the stations and start cooking. Instead I have wait to be seated, order indirectly via a waiter, wait for the chef and staff to prepare more order, etc... It seems to me visiting a website is similar. The user choose to visit the site. That includes the 3rd parties and less controls. Just like I don't get to pick what sources the restaurant used for their food, nor do I have any say in their hiring or management practices. Nor do I have any choice in the music they play or the TVs they have on (bar like restaurants often have TVs). If I don't like their choices my choice is to be or not be a customer. I don't get to hack around that, walking in the back door and taking the food. I know the analogy isn't perfect. It's my computer and I have no obligation to let them use it as they please vs as I please. But still, there's some middle ground IMO between the 2 extremes. |
|
IMO the reason is quite easy to put the finger on:
It's because it is framing the problem squarely as one of the user, culminating in the phrase that one is "voluntarily choosing".
If you don't want to do research and customize scripts for every friggin' domain/website (and having to do it again when the site structure changes), there is no "voluntary choice".
If you don't want to accept that this "solution" has to forgo a lot of essential characteristics of hypermedia, there is no "voluntary choice".
If you're not technically versed in these things, there never was a "voluntary choice" to begin with.
In general, if you want to use the World Wide Web remotely as it is intended, there is no "voluntary choice".