Hacker News Reader

I encourage you to look into (and avoid) tu quoque and whataboutism. They aren't convincing argument strategies.

As to your comparison, as far as I know Zuck isn't selling dangerous consumables, but rather selling your information. One has a direct harm, the other has potential harm.

View on HN

There are food safety institutions to inspect a product of his harm. If Swamy Ramdev is doing anything evil, he cannot get away. There was one incidence when he was selling Gooseberry juice, but a food inspector didnt had its ingredient table, so they matched it with Apple Juice ingredient table. Of course, it would not pass the test. There are various such incidences where misinformation campaign on SM created paranoia.

Oh poo, corruption like paying off inspectors is clearly something that could be done. There is no need to start the discussion of tainted products with an appeal to bureaucracy.

I am not sure how you came to those conclusions you make.

Zuck isn't just selling data. The ads which are deeply targetted haunt you, it feeds on the insecurity of a person and reinforces their beliefs. This has caused many teenagers to suicide.

He is as dangerous as Ramdev if not more.

I don't pay attention to digital advertising, and have seen no ill effects in my own life. As for driving teenagers to suicide: what is this about?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com