Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

If you're trying to change your lifestyle, it's more difficult when you have a bad friend constantly enabling the behavior you're trying to cease.

Google may not have a responsibility to be a good friend, but personally I'd prefer not to have a bad friend always following me around, thus I'm a little less excited about this feature.



sort by: page size:

its a bad friend

Wouldn’t it be easier to get each and every one of your friends to change their daily behaviour to suit a personal choice you made?

Erm, no, no it would not be.


Well if you valued them as a friend you wouldn't make their life more annoying and just install a communicator app

Friends don't let friends depend on web apps.

I suspect this will mainly annoy your friends rather than change their behaviour, though obviously I can't be sure of that from this side the screen.

You can’t opt of it, your friends will make decisions that affect you, bother you with political opinions, share your photos etc.

The author seems to think questions like "why would someone use you over Google?" automatically come from a place of judgement. But a friend can ask that from a place of curiosity. You can have a conversation about it, where they try to understand and where you see important things you don't have good answers to.

I expect my friends to cheer for me and help me live my best life, but I also expect them to poke and prod and question and sanity-check me when I make big decisions. A friend can be supportive and challenge you at the same time.

I would feel hurt and disappointed if I knew a friend had serious reservations about something I was doing but chose not to voice them, instead putting on a smile and pretending it's a great plan. It doesn't feel very friend-y for someone to cheer me as I metaphorically drive off a cliff.


It has a flaw of requiring a person to have friends.

I think if a friend drove two hours to my house and threatened physical violence because they disapproved of my financial and technology decisions, I would have one less friend.

This is a nice idea, and I am glad he includes the "precommitments are even better with a friend" section: An app is something you can always turn off. Betraying a pact you've made with another person is another thing entirely.


The world has enough problems for you, you should be your own friend, not another source of abuse. Friend doesn't mean enabler, though. Good friends don't let their friends do bad things.

If a friend is going to leave you out of an event purely because you do not use their preferred BigTech-facilitated chat tool, then I have done bad news for you: that person might not actually be your friend. Friends don’t treat each other that way.

How can wanting to chill with friends possibly make them a bad friend? You brought up a good point but then kind of ruined it with such a wild accusation.

Hindered with a friend like this? Then, #LYK is the ultimate solution. Know more at http://bit.ly/2keCMF1 #Privacy #Friends #Happiness

If you're good enough friends with someone, and asshole enough, you can simply say that X is the only app you use, and they'll follow.

A single intolerant person can have a huge influence on a group of people that doesn't care to much. Of course, this will earn you a lot of eyerolls, and some friends may decide that not talking to you is easier.


You should encourage your friend to change their behavior.

Hi. Nobody said they are the friends here.

Just that Google is not.


It's ironic that the tool to increase friendship is evil.
next

Legal | privacy