4 ms·
If I were asked for consent for all the things you listed, I'd withhold it. Sort of like how Apple gave users the ability to consent and they overwhelmingly wi
by P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
If I were asked for consent for all the things you listed, I'd withhold it.
Sort of like how Apple gave users the ability to consent and they overwhelmingly withheld it (to the chagrin of FB).
If someone learns they're watched via cameras while in a grocery store, they may not be happy about it but they'll also generally recognize they're on _STORE PROPERTY_.
The key difference here is that this is being done on the _USERS_ property and you're acting as if they shouldn't have to right to withhold that consent.
---
Everyone accepts that an employer may look through company emails of its employees because it goes through company equipment.
These same companies then have the unadulterated gall to turn around and try and claim they have those very same rights on _OTHER PEOPLES EQUIPMENT_.
They're laying claim to other peoples compute.
- Alupis 4y agoThe reality is you wouldn't be allowed to use the site at all then. As invisible as you might want to be, the system does need to track you and your actions to do anything useful at all. We're not talking about a blog or static site here...
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y agoIf someone asks to borrow my car to run to the grocery store and they drive 100 miles away to another state, it's theft. If I consent to have someone use my compute for the operation of their website on my device and they decide to start recording tracking information, it's theft. There is no dichotomy here, it's possible to consent to one use and not another.