Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The author has absolutely no obligation to give an alternative, man. There is also LOSS of value in violations of privacy.

Also: as a mathematician, there is lots of value in a counterexample to part of a proof. Just that, even though the final result is true.




There's no obligation, it just means it's not a good article.


> it just means it's not a good article.

Not necessarily. They included in the article that we could use decentralized contact tracing instead; and, an article arguing against a feature doesn't need an alternative.

If a refrigerator were being released with a microwave, do I really need to provide alternatives to where I could put the microwave instead?

Among other arguments, it argues that contact tracing is a source of mass surveillance. That alone, for the appropriate crowd, is enough reason to not use it. There doesn't need to be an alternative because the alternative is _not having it_.

Just because a bunch of developers ended up wasting their resources on a feature that is a net loss for society doesn't mean that the feature needs to be released.


> They included in the article that we could use decentralized contact tracing instead

GACT is decentralized. The article is arguing against decentralized contact tracing.

> a feature that is a net loss for society

The article doesn't even try to make that argument, which is why it is not very good.




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

Search: