←back to thread

204 points pabs3 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
landl0rd ◴[] No.44084899[source]
I'd rather see bot resistance (important for everyone) and privacy (important for everyone) take precedence over accessibility (important for a small minority) and have laws change to reflect that.
replies(2): >>44084903 #>>44093382 #
singpolyma3 ◴[] No.44084903[source]
I disagree that bot resistance is important to anyone, or even a reasonable goal for anyone at all. Bots are just users
replies(3): >>44084921 #>>44084993 #>>44088814 #
1. landl0rd ◴[] No.44088814[source]
Objectively a lack of bot-resistance can make the service unusable for everyone. Good examples include twitter, where interesting stuff gets flooded by spam DMs and indian payout farmers, and the mentioned ticketing example, where objectively a lack of resistance leads to rent-seeking middlemen scalping tickets.

Similarly a lack of privacy hurts everyone.

The question is basically "would you rather have an equally-shitty service for everyone in the name of egalitarianism or a good service for most?" This seems a really easy choice for me because I don't see egalitarianism/accessibility as a moral imperative.