Just to be clear, I wasn’t being judgmental. I can well understand that people don’t want to pay through the nose for the privilege of escaping a problem Google has created and not them. In fact, NOBODY should have to pay a cent more to preserve their privacy, nor should sustainability and right to repair be an option that costs extra either. I understand where you’re coming from.
But it’s not the case. Sadly, there are sacrifices to make to restore what was normal only 20 years ago - financial, and in terms of convenience. I’m willing to make extreme sacrifices to keep the corporate surveillance collective at bay and defeat planned obsolescence as much as possible, because those are my pet peeves. They may not be yours and you may have a lower tolerance for the differential treatment imposed to those who don’t want to go with the flow. It’s understandable.
Please don’t take what I said the wrong way. I meant no disrespect.
Is that what it means?
Just to be clear, I wasn’t being judgmental. I can well understand that people don’t want to pay through the nose for the privilege of escaping a problem Google has created and not them. In fact, NOBODY should have to pay a cent more to preserve their privacy, nor should sustainability and right to repair be an option that costs extra either. I understand where you’re coming from.
But it’s not the case. Sadly, there are sacrifices to make to restore what was normal only 20 years ago - financial, and in terms of convenience. I’m willing to make extreme sacrifices to keep the corporate surveillance collective at bay and defeat planned obsolescence as much as possible, because those are my pet peeves. They may not be yours and you may have a lower tolerance for the differential treatment imposed to those who don’t want to go with the flow. It’s understandable.
Please don’t take what I said the wrong way. I meant no disrespect.