Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I wish non-conformity was more of a thing at points where it actually matters. Your product manager asks you to add invasive user tracking and surveillance? Push back and explain how this makes the world a worse place. Got a ticket to implement a "[yes][ask me later]" dialog [1]? Make a short survey that shows how user hate it. Nobody listens to you? Refuse to comply. The government requires you to take deeply unethical or unlawful actions? Sabotage the feature [2] (or quit/resign).

Performative non-conformance might be e.g. helpful to nurture a culture of critical thinking, but if it is just performative, then it is worthless.

(I write this with no intent to criticize you, burningChrome, or Jyn. You might very well do just that.)

(Also, I'm aware that the ability to push back is very unevenly distributed. I'm addressing those that can afford this agency. And also, non-conformance is spectrum: You can also push back a little without choosing the specific point to be the hill to die on. Every bit counts.)

[1] https://idiallo.com/blog/hostile-not-enshittification

[2] https://www.404media.co/heres-a-pdf-version-of-the-cia-guide...



Yeah, agreed. Otherwise it's a kind of low stakes "non-conformity", even a conformity of sorts (because everything lowercase is/was actually an internet fad, so it's a kind of "extremely online" conformity).

Non-conformity where it matters would be a lot better, but it's also scarier.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: