8 ms·
I doubt they got consent from everybody in the house - so that's not actually consent. This whole thing is disgusting.
by WantonQuantum 4y ago
I doubt they got consent from everybody in the house - so that's not actually consent.
This whole thing is disgusting.
- redeeman 4y agoif only we had something called "the law" that would have something to say about embedding spyware into consumer products that puts photos of people on the toilet onto facebook. of course these kinds of things dont work for the regular guy
- ilyt 4y agoPretty sure they'd be destroyed if they did that shit in EU
- PaulKeeble 4y agoYou would think so but alas the law isn't actually enforced in many places. It takes a long time for anything to get done as most of the regulators are woefully underfunded. Having the law written is one thing but without the funding to enforce it the law is worthless to most people.
- themitigating 4y agoSo argue for more laws, more enforcement, and more funding for government agencies and watch the same people complaining about this "travesty" turn against you
- ls15 4y agoAfter a decade of collecting data, probably
- john_the_writer 4y agoThe person on the toilet?
- moolcool 4y agoI love the old "Laws like that are why the EU is less innovative than the US" response to critiques like that, given that the past decade or so of innovation feels like it's mostly been finding ways to leverage the previous decade's technology against the user.
- BitwiseFool 4y ago>"if only we had something called "the law" I'm not trying to be flippant, but what is to stop some company from simply utilizing a Terms of Service that allows them to do whatever they want with the data? I often see people chiming in that consumers "agreed" to all of this, even though the vast majority of people never read through the ToS or privacy policy at all.
- EMIRELADERO 4y agoJust write the laws so that they override a contract, pretty simple.
- Chris2048 4y agoToS are often disregarded in courts.
- wkat4242 4y agoToS can't override statutory rights. ToS are often made to be hard to understand.
- orra 4y agoCan't believe you've been downvoted. HN isn't homogonous, but too often has apologists for immoral and illegal behaviour, provided it's done by a technology company.
- stuaxo 4y ago[flagged]
- themitigating 4y ago[flagged]
- nebalee 4y agoI don't think that's right. I feel people here are not generally anti-tech, but ask for tech that benefits users instead of exploiting them.
- astura 4y agoPeople on HN have a pretty bizzare definition of "exploiting users," IMO.
- fsflover 4y agoCould you elaborate?
- omniglottal 4y agoNot op, but in a capitalistic economy where transactions tend to be using legal tender, companies providing things for "free" where the (hidden) cost is submission to Big Brother... well, that's exploitative at the least, dystopic in reality. Your unawareness of this being a BIG issue to those who cannot even choose to pay money for a product which is only "sold" for the price of your privacy... is pretty obviously a result of exploitative marketting and a control of tge dialogue which supercedes any source without a narketting/PR department. Especially while we're now "sold" ephemeral licenses instead of permanent products, and most of these products are bits which cost <$0.001 to reproduce, yet cost more today than a hard-copy did in the past, and the lion's share of profit goes to investors, management, CEOs, and other people who not only cannot produce product, but actively handicap and reduce functionality of products to squeeze ever more profit from the now-choiceless consumers. Does that clarify what has been achingly obvious to many of us who see this writing on the wall?
- amelius 4y agoBut of course, now the person who gave consent is liable ...
- jgalt212 4y agoI'd go one further. Consent is an intellectually lazy framework. For many things that operate under consent, it should be pretty clear whether or not it's OK to do something.
- JKCalhoun 4y agoI agree. If you have to ask for consent, it probably means you've already made a bad engineering/business decision. Engineers should ask before adding a feature, "Is this going to require user consent?" They could have added AI to the Roomba to remove people from the video before it ever even hits the network — or drop that video completely. Or switch to a technology other than visible light, etc.
- john_the_writer 4y agoNah.. if we ask that "is this going to require consent." the best we'll get is. "Thats a product concern that I'm sure they've addressed" Happened to me last week actually :)
- taoufix 4y agoThe only way I see around this is if they upgrade the beta-tester status and give him full control of the images and he's the only one making the labelling and uploading of the results.
- mensetmanusman 4y agoThis is like a ring camera, or an iphone recording, alexa, etc.
- ccn0p 4y agouh except that its purpose is to vacuum the floor.
- mensetmanusman 4y agoSure, I’m talking about the consent though. People are constantly recorded without explicit consent.
- cudgy 4y agoRecordings without audio in public spaces is generally allowed. In some states (single consent), audio is ok too.
- tinus_hn 4y agoBut I don’t doubt the consent form told the user to get the consent of everyone in the house. But hey, mister sour grapes from the article now ‘doesn’t think he consented’ but doesn’t want to show the consent form. If this ever goes to court I don’t doubt this will turn out to be one giant nothingburger.