> involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of, rather than refuting the truth of the accusation Thats not what just happened

> involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of, rather than refuting the truth of the accusation Thats not what just happened. "You accuser" didnt accuse you of being a privacy violation. Smart Phone was brought up as an EXAMPLE of having a microphone and camera in your pocket, connected to the internet. It wasnt a change in subject from tracking devices. >Although you are clearly very confused, because whataboutism is a logical fallacy.... I believe you are the confused one. You changed the subject to a fallacy discussion, by mentioning whataboutism. Its like changing the conversation to fruit by mentioning bananas. Obviously banana is a fruit. >By carrying a smartphone I'm not allowed to care about my privacy? to quote you "instead of just in the privacy of my own home." no one said you arent allowed to be concerned about privacy, but thats not what you said. the "hivemind" disagreed with your PREMISE that you arent currently tracked and that this product would suddenly create tracking ability that doesnt already exist. Its the "instead of just in my home" part people are taking issue with, because the "just in my home" reality doesnt exist.