[ahmedalsudani]

Wonderful. So when, as an individual, I watch a company:

- evading most taxes,

- offering 0 support to users,

- breaking the user experience to force users through their “app funnel,”

- shutting down independent developers without recourse,

- bullying any small fish in their path,

- conspiring to depress labour salaries, and

- shirking any societal or moral obligations,

...that’s just business.

But then when, having observed their psychopathic behaviour, I decide that I don’t want to be part of funding this evil entity, now I’m holding a double standard by accessing the content this monopoly has become the sole gatekeeper for.

Give me a break.

(Leaving untouched the fact that their business model revolves around collecting as much private information as possible.)

[yesplorer]

You're okay with enjoying free food from an armed robber as long as you're not the one he's robbing even though you know the food is funded with proceeds of crime.

[phone[phone]]

You're strawmanning ahmedalsudani's argument. They are not saying that Google is an armed robber, nor is using YouTube anywhere near as essential to survival as food, so this is a bad analogy.

[yesplorer]

They're effectively saying Google is an unethical company and yet they continue to use the platform of this unethical company, a platform whose existence is solely dependent on the unethical practices of Google (as it has been mentioned over and over that Youtube is running at a loss).

[Xeanort]

As long as it's the only place where I can have food, yes.

[phone[phone]]

yesplorer is using the time honored "won't somebody think of the corporations?!" deflection.

[yesplorer]

i don't care about Google. All I'm saying is if you hate the organization, don't be a parasite and us their platform. It's just about principle.