Electron is an established technology, offers acceptable performance for most users and doesn't - for the most part - require specific technical skills.
You basically webdev with it and have a native looking app.
Those could - but don't have to be - valid arguments for using it while still retaining self respect, e.g. making an informed choice on what is best for the project one is working on.
Most users accept it because they have no better choice. If an app is terribly slow but a lot of online communities and friends use it, what are they gonna do, just not interact with others? You want to play recent Nintendo games but don't want to regularly replace the controllers due to an unfixed issue that affects roughly 50 million people and has a perfectly working solution for over 20 years? Too bad. But I guess Nintendo calls it acceptable for most users because it's not quite bad enough that people stop using a product they paid for.
Vote with your wallet or conscience, and don't buy or use it. This null choice is always conveniently missing when people say there is no "better choice." The fact that people continue to do so means there is at least some value in the product as it is. Therefore, it is acceptable to most people, or otherwise they wouldn't continue to use it.
Yes, try regulating companies to not use Electron apps and see where that takes you. Regulation is generally reserved for egregious examples of corporate abuse, not using Electron or not. Now if there was a regulation for being able to choose client apps and have interoperability, like the EU is doing, then that's something I can get behind.
Sorry, the thread itself is about a particular topic and it is reasonable to assume that we are talking about that topic when making broader statements. Writing a drive-by comment about how it's a "thought-terminating cliché," which might be true when talking about a universal phrase but not for a particular case, is not very useful.
I guess you don't understand: saying 'if you don't like it, don't buy it' is a thought-terminating cliche. Just because people use something doesn't mean it is good, and not using it as an individual will not cause any change.
That's a fantastic way to deprive yourself of the things you like for no gain whatsoever. Voting with our wallets got us to where we are today.
People are already voting with their wallets and they're overwhelmingly voting for more exploitation, partially "helped" by the manipulation systematically employed in the industry that's already worked wonders for classic gambling.
And Valve investing in Linux gaming had nothing to do with the size of the target audience - luckily for us.
This thread is people who ship BS products, that the rest of the population is then stuck with using, and which hold the practice decades back (not to mention being bad for the environment).
Those could - but don't have to be - valid arguments for using it while still retaining self respect, e.g. making an informed choice on what is best for the project one is working on.