zlacker

Sounds like a variant of the "nothing to hide" argument which, IMO, isn't particularly logical.

>>Knobbl+(OP)
I don't think it's the same. It's more the assumption that stuff is going to keep working forever. A lot of us have been around long enough to see the change. Many haven't. Their first email address may have been a gmail.com one for example and they still have it. I mean a friend of mine still has a hotmail address from the late 1990s that works.

>>Knobbl+(OP)
It's closer to explaining Coca-Cola anti-union murders in Colombia or the use of child labor and forced labor in P&G palm oil products.

"I can keep buying this stuff, and can't practically avoid it, therefore it doesn't affect me."

Most people don't want to dedicate hours a day to a "vote with your feet" attempt that will not even register on corporations' balance sheets.

>>lozeng+p6
There's a difference between active boycott and explicitly stating you don't really care.

You can be against something and not have the resource to fight it. The person in question said they don't see the problem which is the former.