401–410 of 430 posts
Someone built a tool. And someone else used that tool to do an unethical thing. I doubt a software language exists that can control the choices of its users.
I'm sure this will be downvoted to hell and back, but still: http://jesuschristsiliconvalley.tumblr.com/post/46539276780/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Does Path actually say "We're going to invite all your friends via SMS", even in fine print? Should it? More importantly, will anyone download the app in the first place if it did? No one -- in their right minds -- would suddenly want to share (non-existent) photos with all their contacts. Seems like an odd way to say "We're going to invite all your friends via SMS". Your address book doesn't consist primarily of yo…
Without addressing the opt-in point, which I agree with... You're also assuming there is no "continue without doing this" button, which of course, I was assuming there would be... Many users just mash on the "next" button on app intro screens. Again, it's all just speculation until someone takes the time to start researching and documenting the facts instead of just yelling "KILL IT"! :/
How about another detail -- the fact that the message said the user had photos to share, when he didn't? There's annoying spam, and then there's straight-out-lying spam -- the "x has sent you a message, you need to create an account to view it" type. Just curious, is there a way to sue/fine a company like this for false advertising, essentially?
We need to nip this in the bud. Maybe it's time to create a Hippocratic Oath for developers to publicly commit to? A future Path developer could then refuse to implement an unethical "feature" by pointing out that the company had hired them with the full knowledge that the oath had been undertaken. I don't think the company would pink slip the developer, as they would probably want to avoid any attention being drawn…
Perhaps the guy checked a box that said "Please notify all of my contacts via text message".
Then all the messages went into queue that was delayed a bit.
Then the phone companies converted text messages to voice calls.
They are showing the world what could happen if your data lands in the wrong hands. I hope people now become more aware of privacy and security issues thanks to Path. Tell me which other company is directly working for this cause? FB and Google keep telling that they won't use our date for bad purposes. Path is showing what can be done with the data they already have.
So this is why I like Path. They are setting an example of what bad companies can do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an important sticking point. Maybe a Professional Engineering certification isn't the solution, but let's not get hung up here. Example: P.E. certified people should have no problem creating weapons systems for a nation-state at war. Does that make it ethical? Depends on who writes the history books afterward. Example: P.E. certified people might refuse to participate in experimental, unorthodox methods. But…
Your _personal_ ethics can easily get you _fired_.
If you believe that standing up for your strongly-held beliefs will get you fired, you should look for a new job _now_. Sure, that incurs the trouble and uncertainty of a job switch, and possibly a pay cut (though perhaps less of that than you think). But if it means that you don't have to be ashamed of what you do all day --- it's generally worth it.
How about another detail -- the fact that the message said the user had photos to share, when he didn't? There's annoying spam, and then there's straight-out-lying spam -- the "x has sent you a message, you need to create an account to view it" type. Just curious, is there a way to sue/fine a company like this for false advertising, essentially?
And the messages Facebook sends me telling me about an event and letting me know that one of my friends is a guest, when they've been invited but haven't actually confirmed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no official support for this AFAIK. Some 3rd party ROMs like Cyanogenmod have this functionality built in, though, and if you root your phone there are apps like "Permissions Denied" that you can run to do this. I'd assume the reason Google is somewhat hesitant to offer this officially is that many apps don't deal well with this -- some do degrade gracefully, while others end up throwing task-ending exceptio…
There is a simple solution for managing permissions for poorly built apps: serve them empty or fake data. Every app already has to consider the case of GPS being unavailable indoors, the contact list only having one person (yourself) in it, or the camera picture being black in darkness.
I'm sure some apps will fail anyway because they just never expected a contact list of 0 entries, but the list should be much smaller in that situation (mostly limited to those who do virtually no QA).