4 ms·

What would be better is if the US had (does it?) a nation-wide law requiring explicit opt-in, as opposed to having to opt out of surveillance. Small steps forwa

by 3gg 6y ago

What would be better is if the US had (does it?) a nation-wide law requiring explicit opt-in, as opposed to having to opt out of surveillance. Small steps forward. Also, does this form really amount to anything other than "we promise we won't spy you that much?" Are banks audited in this regard, or are they subject to the same non-existent regulations as the Sillycon Valley surveillance?

alpb 6y ago
“Better” for who? The corporations or the people? United States usually favors one over the other by design.
- 3gg 6y ago
  We the People. Though I think US law/courts also regards corporations as people.
- ksk 6y ago
  By design, democracy favors entities who care, and therefore lobby for change. Corporations do the majority of the lobbying and it shows.
earthboundkid 6y ago
I will take what I can get, but the obviously correct thing is for user targeting and sale of third party information to be illegal, never-mind opt in.
- 3gg 6y ago
  You're ten steps ahead :)