Google has defended its Web Environment Integrity on the grounds that it aims to make web browsing more private and safe through tokens.

Attacks and doxing make me personally MORE likely to support stronger safety features in chromium, as such acts increase my suspicion that there is significant intimidation from criminals who are afraid this feature will disrupt their illegal and/or unethical businesses, and I don’t give in to criminals or bullies

Kick a puppy
Get attacked for kicking a puppy
“These attacks make me MORE likely to keep kicking puppies, as I don’t give in to intimidation from criminals and bullies that want healthy puppies for their nefarious ends.”

  • @[email protected]
    -59•1 year ago

    Kick a puppy

    If you have to resort to false equivalences like these, you’re not really making the anti-WEI crowd look good.

    *Edit: * There’s some massive misunderstanding about my comment.

    I called it a false equivalency because it’s comparing both the measures (“stronger safety”) and the thing is supposed to prevent (doxing and bullying) to puppy kicking.

    That’s just emotional manipulation done badly. We all call it out when politicians use pedophiles to warrant Internet surveillance, and now apply it ourselves? I don’t know about you, but when I see bad reasoning, I’ll call it out. Even if it’s done by “my side”.

    • @[email protected]
      76•1 year ago

      Analogies are inherently false equivalences.

      It’s illustrating the problem with the argument, not equating DRM technology with puppy kicking.

      • @[email protected]English
        9•1 year ago

        Though, for the record, this is one of the few situations where humanity would have been better off if Google had simply paid their web engineers to go out into the world and kick animals all day long instead.

      • @[email protected]
        -2•1 year ago

        Both support stronger safety features in chromium and criminals and bullies got equated to kicking puppies. That’s why it’s a shoddy attempt at illustrating their reasoning.

    • ruffslOPEnglish
      51•1 year ago

      I think the comment that the_lego is replying to also highlights the false equivalency of calling the anti-WEI crowd as criminals, as was not a good look for Google.

      They have apologized for using the word criminals & bullies in a broader context and I appreciate that. However, the initial part of the comment is very telling of how they view those who oppose.

    • Scary le Poo
      17•1 year ago

      That is an analogy.

      The analogy being, do something objectively bad, get called out for it, double down because you don’t like getting called out for it.

      No one is equivocating anti-wei people to puppies.

      • @[email protected]
        0•1 year ago

        There’s some massive misunderstanding about my comment.

        I called it a false equivalency because it’s comparing both the measures (“stronger safety”) and the thing is supposed to prevent (doxing and bullying) to puppy kicking.

        That’s just emotional manipulation done badly. We all call it out when politicians use pedophiles to warrant Internet surveillance, and now apply it ourselves? I don’t know about you, but when I see bad reasoning, I’ll call it out. Even if it’s done by “my side”.

        • Scary le Poo
          3•1 year ago

          No, it was not a comparison, it was an ANALOGY.

          “A relationship of resemblance or equivalence between two situations, people, or objects, especially when used as a basis for explanation or extrapolation.”

          The important word here is resemblance. This is an analogy showing a resemblance, not a comparison.

    • @[email protected]
      2•1 year ago

      This is quite a bit worse than kicking a puppy. Of course, it’s horrible when puppies get kicked but ultimately they will be on. This, on the other hand would be a major set back to humanity, potentially permanent as our rights and privacy are erroded day by day.