That is like saying standing up to authoritarianism is extremely necessary, while proposing to drop nukes on Russia. There are 100 better ways to do it.
Yes you’re right, blocking a single corporation is totally similar to dropping a nuclear weapon on a civilian site, you’ve shown me the error of my ways.
What “normal solutions” are actually in progress with any real potential of happening? Be for fucking real.
Meanwhile what insane doomsday scenario do you think would happen if Google services were banned and people had the given period to find alternatives?
You’re talking about a fantasy solution that doesn’t exist then blowing the consequences of this possible action wildly out of proportion in gross hyperbole.
What “normal solutions” are actually in progress with any real potential of happening?
Fines.
Besides, your solution is in progress or “has better chance” of happening? Wake the fuck up.
Meanwhile what insane doomsday scenario do you think would happen if Google services were banned
Google runs 12% of all cloud services through google cloud. Yes, I expect a “doomsday scenario” if you just shut that down.
and people had the given period to find alternatives?
Sure, give people and companies 5-10 years to migrate and it will probably be fine in terms of chaos, though I would still be very interested to know how many billions of € would the migration cost.
I think people and societies are vastly more resilient that you’re implying, and would survive an admittedly complex 6 month period to switch necessary services. Would it be hard? Yeah absolutely. But I’ve never accepted “but it’s so hard!!” as valid reason to hold off positive progress.
Worthwhile chaos. It’s exactly that fear of consequences that enables their power
Unnecessary chaos
Taking a stance against corporate overreach feels extremely necessary to me.
That is like saying standing up to authoritarianism is extremely necessary, while proposing to drop nukes on Russia. There are 100 better ways to do it.
Yes you’re right, blocking a single corporation is totally similar to dropping a nuclear weapon on a civilian site, you’ve shown me the error of my ways.
Holy fucking hyperbole, Batman!
When looking at the relative difference between cost of your solution, it’s benefits and cost of normal solutions, yes. It is extremely similar.
But go ahead nitpicking my exact choice of comparison instead of addressing the glaring issue with your argument.
What “normal solutions” are actually in progress with any real potential of happening? Be for fucking real.
Meanwhile what insane doomsday scenario do you think would happen if Google services were banned and people had the given period to find alternatives?
You’re talking about a fantasy solution that doesn’t exist then blowing the consequences of this possible action wildly out of proportion in gross hyperbole.
Fines.
Besides, your solution is in progress or “has better chance” of happening? Wake the fuck up.
Google runs 12% of all cloud services through google cloud. Yes, I expect a “doomsday scenario” if you just shut that down.
Sure, give people and companies 5-10 years to migrate and it will probably be fine in terms of chaos, though I would still be very interested to know how many billions of € would the migration cost.
I think people and societies are vastly more resilient that you’re implying, and would survive an admittedly complex 6 month period to switch necessary services. Would it be hard? Yeah absolutely. But I’ve never accepted “but it’s so hard!!” as valid reason to hold off positive progress.
deleted by creator