Right, just like anyone could stop using anything they found objectionable or immoral and keep their mouths shut about it, but this is exactly the type of thing not to keep your mouth shut about.
Software that enable you to do something should at some point just do that. To get good at something, invest time and money into an ecosystem that takes a lot of both to invest in, shouldn’t arbitrarily use that as leverage against it’s users to impose it’s morals on them.
Sure she could switch to gimp, and arguably she should literally because of things like this, but that’s not something you can easily do with everything, and it’s worth calling out when a corporation leverages a virtual monopoly on something to force it’s users to comply with something like it’s judgement of content.
We’re lucky enough to have open source versions of a lot of things, but you don’t get anywhere simply voting with your wallet. Where you get somewhere is voting with a lot of people’s wallets.
usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
Sure, but a tool shouldn’t care how you use it.
Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
Exactly. This shit should not be normalized. It is bonkers that a professionally marketed tool is trying to coddle anyone.
Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 week ago
And that’s exactly why you don’t use it