3 ms·

> They swear they are implementing telemetry, but their privacy policy implies tracking. You don’t need to worry about minors or handing personal information o

by fouric 5y ago

> They swear they are implementing telemetry, but their privacy policy implies tracking. You don’t need to worry about minors or handing personal information over unless you’re storing it. Good point - reminds me of a principle I recently heard someone espouse, "Disregard whatever promises a corporation/individual in power makes, and only pay attention to their legal constraints."

GuB-42 5y ago
I don't agree with the last statement. Just because you have the legal right to be an asshole doesn't mean you are an asshole. And conversely, the law can be broken, and clever loopholes can be exploited. There may be consequences, but it doesn't you will get repaid personally. For me, privacy policies are just indicative. I try to approach the problem considering incentives, risks and benefits. What are the consequences for breaking the promise, for me, and for the company. For the company, imagine yourself as a shareholder, you want to maximize your profit, you know that by breaking your promise customers will be unhappy, will they go to the competition? is your image a valuable asset? is the short term profit worth it? For you, what is leaked? How will it affect your productivity and security? Can you easily switch to a competitor? At what point too much is too much? If I only cared about legal constraints, I would get into every scam. I mean, advance fee fraud is illegal, so that Nigerian prince cannot take my money, right?
- skeeter2020 5y ago
  >> Just because you have the legal right to be an asshole doesn't mean you are an asshole If they're explicitly carving out the legal rights to be an asshole, I think it's fair to assume, regardless of what they say, they are going to quickly become a giant asshole.
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    I've literally never seen a contract that contained a prohibition on being an asshole. If you are presented with a contract that doesn't contain such a condition it doesn't tell you anything about the intentions of your counter-party
- IntrepidWorm 5y ago
  Corporations are obliged to their shareholders, not their consumers. Furthermore, if the service is marketed as free to downstream consumers, those same consumers are more likely in some way the product. Therefore, any action that increases shareholder confidence in the company is liable to be taken. Harming downstream consumers can sometimes be damaging to shareholder confidence, but isn't necessarily. In essence, companies are incentivized to be "assholes" when it furthers their valuation. Unfortunately, being an "asshole" is very often a lucrative move as long as it's done carefully. I don't believe everyone who works at a large corporation (example being Amazon) is evil and immoral. However, collective action taken by the company on large scales has shown in many cases to have "asshole" effects. Also, fuck Jeff Bezos.

by fouric 5y ago

GuB-42 5y ago

I don't agree with the last statement. Just because you have the legal right to be an asshole doesn't mean you are an asshole. And conversely, the law can be broken, and clever loopholes can be exploited. There may be consequences, but it doesn't you will get repaid personally. For me, privacy policies are just indicative. I try to approach the problem considering incentives, risks and benefits. What are the consequences for breaking the promise, for me, and for the company. For the company, imagine yourself as a shareholder, you want to maximize your profit, you know that by breaking your promise customers will be unhappy, will they go to the competition? is your image a valuable asset? is the short term profit worth it? For you, what is leaked? How will it affect your productivity and security? Can you easily switch to a competitor? At what point too much is too much? If I only cared about legal constraints, I would get into every scam. I mean, advance fee fraud is illegal, so that Nigerian prince cannot take my money, right?

skeeter2020 5y ago
>> Just because you have the legal right to be an asshole doesn't mean you are an asshole If they're explicitly carving out the legal rights to be an asshole, I think it's fair to assume, regardless of what they say, they are going to quickly become a giant asshole.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  I've literally never seen a contract that contained a prohibition on being an asshole. If you are presented with a contract that doesn't contain such a condition it doesn't tell you anything about the intentions of your counter-party
IntrepidWorm 5y ago
Corporations are obliged to their shareholders, not their consumers. Furthermore, if the service is marketed as free to downstream consumers, those same consumers are more likely in some way the product. Therefore, any action that increases shareholder confidence in the company is liable to be taken. Harming downstream consumers can sometimes be damaging to shareholder confidence, but isn't necessarily. In essence, companies are incentivized to be "assholes" when it furthers their valuation. Unfortunately, being an "asshole" is very often a lucrative move as long as it's done carefully. I don't believe everyone who works at a large corporation (example being Amazon) is evil and immoral. However, collective action taken by the company on large scales has shown in many cases to have "asshole" effects. Also, fuck Jeff Bezos.