Any objection "This tool is built on stolen data" doesn't change based on whether I have used the tool for 50 hours or not.
By defining a "center" only through the lens of usage we don't find objectivity. This sounds like rationalising survivorship bias for those who are able to pay and participate.
I’m not disputing that. The argument in the article is a much narrower one: use. It’s that without use, one’s view of how it behaves in practice is second-hand from the people that engage.
If all ones criticism is confine within ethical or monetary concerns then this article does not apply.
For example 'the center' You are already talking about a subset of (probably English speaking) programmers let alone the population at large. So that's a bias there. And you've chosen the centre, other people may not agree with where you've put the centre. I for example am accused of being right wing and left wing. Presumably the accusers didn't think I was in the centre.
Having said all this, I do agree with your points, I don't think you'll have much luck actually improving the level of conversation though.
