@tante

Computers and all that goes with them cost a helluva lot more than paper.

@tante Yes! Sometimes people just need to talk to each other.

Some of my clients separated their company into individually run divisions. The employees in one don't talk to the other. Bu they do talk to IT and demand the COO to fix their human lack of communication with more tech.

Like, no!

Just talk to each other already. You work for the same company!

@tante This is because very often, the additional software or technology is more a way to ignore the problem.

And what really solves it is either activism or direct action in comparably much lesser quantities.

@tante
This may be also because most software designers fail to put their ethics first...

https://artinbsd.blogspot.com/2012/03/artistic-intent.html?m=1

#software

@tante
Like voting computers:
Local municipality went for these some years ago because they’re, like, shiny and “digital” and supposidly save time.

CCC (hacker’s association, ie: who everyone expected to be maximally excited about this) sued against these and had them found unconsitutional!

Why? Well, the consitution requires the ballot process to be understande and comprehensible by lay persons so that there never can be a situation where a claims of the vote having been rigged are impossible to verify. (We’re talking about hard power interests here after all.)

A vote conducted using a computer is not comprehensible by lay persons. Period.

Nerds would often be like: “But, but we could use blinded tokens, we could use zero-knoweldge proofs. It be completely verifiable!”
Yes, to like 2 people on Earth maybe!

To proof it to everyone else we’d need a papertrail and verify that. An activity generally refered to as “counting the votes”...
Might as well stick to that then.

#tech #techethics