[gkoberger]

I “get” technology so I understand how you got here.

But this is the wrong take. I expect to go to a restaurant and not die from the food… and I want nothing to do with the inner workings of the kitchen. I just want to know any restaurant I go into will be safe. Society has made restaurants safe, either because of government pressure or it’s good for business.

How is that not a fair ask for technology, too? We all have things we know well, and then there’s reasons we’re alive that we don’t even know exist because someone took care of it.

It’s unreasonable to only allow people to participate in society once they understand every nuance.

[grishka]

Your analogy doesn't work here. Going to a restaurant is like using an app store. Installing apks is like cooking at home. Nothing stops you from cooking a meal that will get you sick.

Now imagine that every restaurant in your city is owned by one of two megacorporations and they really don't want you to have a microwave at home, let alone a stove. They expect that you will get all your food from them. This is where it's going with apps right now.

[jackpeterfletch]

It works fine for the point that they were making.

Which is that the fact that restaurants have to certify for food safety training and pass regular inspection is perfectly reasonable, and allows those who aren't experts in those areas, or want to continually inspect kitchens to dine out in confidence & conveinience. (or at least vastly reduced risk).

There should be some equivalent, safe, experience in the technology space. Especially given how powerful a tool of liberation it is.

Of course, who controls that, and the ability to turn off those safeguards is important for many many other reasons and... also a question of liberty. And so I think it is a difficult conflict to resolve elegantly.

[bombcar]

You could torture the analogy more and say that this is more like saying "it is possible to make bad food and kill yourself at home, so we require everyone to go to a restaurant."

[bigbuppo]

Well, I mean, do you know many houses burn down because someone fell asleep while frying a pork chop? We should just get rid of kitchens at home because it's just not safe.

[lovehashbrowns]

Oil fires cause immense damage to property and life! I don’t know why stoves are allowed in homes at all. Worse yet, they don’t implement any age verification, so a child can just turn on the burner! It’s crazy!

[JuniperMesos]

People are actually trying to legally ban gas stoves in homes based on reasoning similar to this.

[gzread]

I thought that was because they emit pollution into the room that was actually (not theoretical) linked to substantially higher risk of the occupants of the home getting asthma?

[bigbuppo]

Yes, it increases it by 0.00% and if we get rid of cooking entirely, we can lower it even further.

[econ]

The unmonitored copying alone!

[mx7zysuj4xew]

Because no amount of safeguards put up by the restaurant is going to protect you from getting sick of you decide to empty a bottle of bleach into your meal.

[bloqs]

This captures the issue well

[dminik]

If you want to cook at home, there's no waiting list. There's no popup you have to confirm three times. You buy a stove, which likely lasts you half your life, a fridge, some dishes, pots, pans and so on.

I think it's fine to give people an easy mode. Not everyone cares about cooking (or tech). I just wish companies weren't trying to take the advanced features from the rest of us who do care.

[TobTobXX]

I think it is different for some people because they are passionate and interested in tech.

I'd imagine someone who is passionate about cooking wouldn't be delighted if you cloudn't buy any ingredients in a store.

I see the value in precooked food and black-box working technology. But for me myself, as an enthusiast: I like being able to tinker and control my technology.

[BatteryMountain]

So the solution being proposed by multiple companies, is that the restaurant is now responsible to check your age and gender before they bring you something from the kitchen. Also, now you cannot tell the kitchen to use your toaster as some toasters are built to burn the restaurant down or poison the food.

It still doesn't make sense, we need a better plan.

[fhn]

you expect a restaurant to be safe but there is no guarantee that it is. Many people have had food poisoning and I am sure some have died. It is obvious you don't "get" technology at all. You don't even "get" restaurants.

[knollimar]

More like some users have shellfish problems so the restauarants stop serving shellfish. Apparently the "contains shellfish" labels aren't enough

[Klonoar]

The ask is fair but the distinction regarding one or two companies total being the arbiter of this is the issue.

[ekianjo]

Bad analogies are bad analogies

[schubidubiduba]

And I expect to be able to open a restauraunt without surrendering my identity and private information to a huge monopolistic company.

And I expect to buy food without that food being sanctioned by a huge, monopolistic company. Especially if said company has shown itself to be completely subservient to an overbearing, increasingly fascist government.