3 ms·
I’m trying to help teach the AI, but some options don’t have to do with privacy at all. For instance, I got (option A): The Games Press Web site can, option
by 1f60c 7y ago
I’m trying to help teach the AI, but some options don’t have to do with privacy at all.
For instance, I got (option A):
The Games Press Web site can, optionally, store a Cookie on your computer in order to automatically log you into the site on each visit.
and option B:
Back to Top ^ NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES There shall be no third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement.
It would be great to have a skip/flag option for cases like these.
Edit to add:
Some other notes:
- Mozilla, a tech company I consider ethical, is right down there with Netflix, LinkedIn and Waze
- The box under “Sentence Breakdown by Risk Level” is empty when my ad blocker is enabled (Adguard on iOS Safari)
- Telegram, a company I also consider ethical, has a score of 105%—is this an oversight?
- quickthrower2 7y agoAnd sometimes you get two privacy friendly policies and I'd like to say "equal". After a few of those I picked one at random and then it puts me onto some kind of 'Game' which made me feel they were trying to train me instead of vice-versa. The game didn't respond to clicks so I closed the app.
- krageon 7y agoThe fact that you consider companies ethical is neither here nor there for the privacy score of their policy though. You haven't made a very strong case as to why your opinion needs to impact the metrics (or really given any justification for your feelings at all). As to your two options having nothing to do with privacy: The fact that there cannot be any third-party beneficiaries is in fact a baldly privacy-friendly statement, because a third party is yet another party that may influence a privacy policy in a net-negative way.