I suppose one might argue that if they [prism] then they don’t value user trust, and therefore user trust wouldn’t be a reason for them to not [easter eggs]. H

I suppose one might argue that if they [prism] then they don’t value user trust, and therefore user trust wouldn’t be a reason for them to not [easter eggs]. However, that would seem to be based on an idea of valuing which is absolute, and which accepts no trade-offs. Conceivably they could value user trust (at least, instrumentally value it), but value what they would get out of doing [prism] more, per amount of lost user trust, then they value what they would get from [easter eggs] per amount of (somehow?) lost user trust. (Words in square brackets are abbreviations for the activity relevant to the words in the square brackets)