5 ms·

You logged in to Google. That's opting in.

by VikingCoder 7y ago

JohnFen 7y ago
It's not opting in if there's no informed consent.
- VikingCoder 7y ago
  It is your responsibility to understand the terms and conditions of creating and using a Google account. If you're not informed, it's your fault. You did legally consent. That said, could Google do better at explaining these things and giving controls and changing opt-outs to opt-ins? Sure. But the argument you made is false.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    > It is your responsibility to understand the terms and conditions Terms and conditions are written to be very opaque and to obscure what you're "agreeing" to. What you're saying is that you need to effectively be an attorney in order to be able to have informed consent. > You did legally consent. I didn't say otherwise. I was talking about actual consent, not legal consent. > But the argument you made is false. I disagree, obviously.
    - VikingCoder 7y ago
      > What you're saying is that you need to effectively be an attorney in order to be able to have informed consent. Or read commentary about it. Which exists in abundance. > I was talking about actual consent, not legal consent. If you could define what you mean by "actual consent," and compare it to "legal consent," that would be great.
      - JohnFen 7y ago
        > Or read commentary about it. Which exists in abundance. Commentary about terms and conditions doesn't really help for a whole bunch of reasons. What I mean by "actual consent" is that I've been fully informed what the deal is and I've actively said "yes". Legal consent is a lower bar than that. For example, if a service lays out the deal in a document that can't be clearly understood by a normal person and/or that is ambiguous (meaning that a normal person can reasonably understand it to mean something that it does not mean), agreeing to it is legal consent, but not real consent -- real consent requires that each party fully know what they're consenting to.
        VikingCoder 7y ago
        Isn't that entirely your responsibility? I mean, what do you wish were different?
        JohnFen 7y ago
        > Isn't that entirely your responsibility? You can argue that, but as I said, that would require everyone to be a lawyer in order to properly analyze and understand those agreements. I think that's an unreasonable expectation. What I wish were different is three things: 1) That I am clearly and correctly informed what would happen to my data if I agree (and that those terms will not change without me being clearly and correctly informed of the change before it happens and my consent being obtained again). 2) That I have to explicitly consent rather than having consent "implied" by, for instance, just beginning to use a service. And if the data is going to be used or handled by an entity other than the one I'm directly dealing with, that entity also has to get my explicit consent. 3) That no data is collected about me in the absence of my overt consent. To be honest, it's #3 that angers me the most. My data is constantly being collected without my consent merely by doing things like going to a web site, or playing a game, or that companies like Facebook and Google get data about me when I buy something in a physical store using a credit/debit card.

You logged in to Google. That's opting in.

JohnFen 7y ago

It's not opting in if there's no informed consent.

VikingCoder 7y ago
It is your responsibility to understand the terms and conditions of creating and using a Google account. If you're not informed, it's your fault. You did legally consent. That said, could Google do better at explaining these things and giving controls and changing opt-outs to opt-ins? Sure. But the argument you made is false.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > It is your responsibility to understand the terms and conditions Terms and conditions are written to be very opaque and to obscure what you're "agreeing" to. What you're saying is that you need to effectively be an attorney in order to be able to have informed consent. > You did legally consent. I didn't say otherwise. I was talking about actual consent, not legal consent. > But the argument you made is false. I disagree, obviously.
  - VikingCoder 7y ago
    > What you're saying is that you need to effectively be an attorney in order to be able to have informed consent. Or read commentary about it. Which exists in abundance. > I was talking about actual consent, not legal consent. If you could define what you mean by "actual consent," and compare it to "legal consent," that would be great.
    - JohnFen 7y ago
      > Or read commentary about it. Which exists in abundance. Commentary about terms and conditions doesn't really help for a whole bunch of reasons. What I mean by "actual consent" is that I've been fully informed what the deal is and I've actively said "yes". Legal consent is a lower bar than that. For example, if a service lays out the deal in a document that can't be clearly understood by a normal person and/or that is ambiguous (meaning that a normal person can reasonably understand it to mean something that it does not mean), agreeing to it is legal consent, but not real consent -- real consent requires that each party fully know what they're consenting to.
      - VikingCoder 7y ago
        Isn't that entirely your responsibility? I mean, what do you wish were different?
        JohnFen 7y ago
        > Isn't that entirely your responsibility? You can argue that, but as I said, that would require everyone to be a lawyer in order to properly analyze and understand those agreements. I think that's an unreasonable expectation. What I wish were different is three things: 1) That I am clearly and correctly informed what would happen to my data if I agree (and that those terms will not change without me being clearly and correctly informed of the change before it happens and my consent being obtained again). 2) That I have to explicitly consent rather than having consent "implied" by, for instance, just beginning to use a service. And if the data is going to be used or handled by an entity other than the one I'm directly dealing with, that entity also has to get my explicit consent. 3) That no data is collected about me in the absence of my overt consent. To be honest, it's #3 that angers me the most. My data is constantly being collected without my consent merely by doing things like going to a web site, or playing a game, or that companies like Facebook and Google get data about me when I buy something in a physical store using a credit/debit card.