"... A lot of people have few prospects of employment - especially right now - and have bills to pay."
Have you considered that you may be engaging with and replying to someone who falls into this category? What makes you think I am or speaking from the POV of an engineer who has employers fawning over them?
Beyond that though - why do you think that people do not have the ability to exercise their own choice in the matter? The final paragraph of this article literally underscores my point:
"Rather than download the software on her computer, she opted out."
So your assumptions of who you are interacting with on this topic appear ignorant, your belief in other people inability to choose whats best for them suggests you do not respect their power, meanwhile you've created the only extreme - as in extremely unlikely scenario - whereby people are forced to choose between self-administered surveillance or starvation.
So is it the case? Do you have very few prospects of employments and yet would willingly chose living in poverty over surveillance of your laptop?
I don't think it's as unlikely as you seem to believe. There are no stats being brought forward on either side, so I don't see how your scenario is less or more likely than mine. And I am merely trying to empathize with the people for whom this is the sad reality.
I'm not convinced whatsoever that this surveil or starve ultimatum you have made up represents anyone's reality in the first place...let alone those examples in this article.
It's beyond your imagination to conceive that there are people who would have to accept something they loathe because they must feed their family and pay the mortgage in a very immediate future?
I'm totally open to changing my mind that this hypothetical person doesn't exist in the US, if you'd like to bring forward a peer reviewed study on the subject.
You haven't heard of anyone working a job they hate in general? Why do you think they continue working? Is it because they just love feeling miserable for 8 hours a day? Or maybe it is because if they quit, they won't have an easily available opportunity waiting for them, that would allow to feed their family, pay bills, etc.?
This is one of the very few times I've seen someone make a serious argument on HN so ridiculous, I cannot believe this is real. And not only make it in the first place, but then also double- and triple-down on it.
"You haven't heard of anyone working a job they hate in general?"
Yes I hear from people like this often.
Why do you think they continue working?
Some do continue doing things they hate, while others don't and they change their situation. Those that hate their job but don't change, I don't know their reasoning? Learned helplessness? Lazyness?
"Or maybe it is because if they quit, they won't have an easily available opportunity waiting for them, that would allow to feed their family, pay bills, etc.?"
What is easy? What is hard? That's too subjective - I'm not passing judgement in that area, just know that it's possible to change - always - no matter what anyone on HN says.
Have you considered that you may be engaging with and replying to someone who falls into this category? What makes you think I am or speaking from the POV of an engineer who has employers fawning over them?
Beyond that though - why do you think that people do not have the ability to exercise their own choice in the matter? The final paragraph of this article literally underscores my point:
"Rather than download the software on her computer, she opted out."
So your assumptions of who you are interacting with on this topic appear ignorant, your belief in other people inability to choose whats best for them suggests you do not respect their power, meanwhile you've created the only extreme - as in extremely unlikely scenario - whereby people are forced to choose between self-administered surveillance or starvation.