▲ | jrflowers a day ago | |||||||
Interesting. While there is no such thing as a chauffeurs union or an FSD alliance, if we say that they exist maybe they do. Similarly, if you say something is “FUD” then maybe it becomes that. I genuinely do not understand the last two sentences. Are you pro- or anti- “telling people that salmonella exists” ? Is saying “salmonella exists and can be a problem” FUD or what? Do you think salmonella isn’t real | ||||||||
▲ | fc417fc802 a day ago | parent [-] | |||||||
Yes, the final two were tongue in cheek but follow the same pattern and thus serve to illustrate the point being made. You don't seem to be engaging in good faith. > Is saying “salmonella exists and can be a problem” FUD or what? Obviously that depends on context. If a bunch of restaurants form a PAC and start lobbying with that message to restrict the sale of animal products at the grocery store then it is. If the FDA mentions it on a page about basic food handling safety then it probably isn't (depending on the surrounding text ofc). Rooting your device is a security risk the same way that servicing your own car is a safety risk. When I hear "security risk" or "safety risk" I'm expecting something that's inherently dangerous like wingsuit jumping or cave diving. I'm not expecting something that should only ever fail if I don't exercise due diligence. This difference in perceived meaning is being exploited by those spreading the message similar to when Coca-Cola got sued for a label that implied pomegranate juice when the bottle contained only 0.3 percent. When device vendors lock end users out of their own devices and then aggressively spread such a message to justify doing so it qualifies as FUD or propaganda. A vested interest has disenfranchised people as part of a long term strategy to enrich themselves and is attempting to manipulate the public narrative regarding their actions. | ||||||||
|