4 ms·
> As far as I can tell, you're saying "what you're worried about is already happening, so why bother being concerned about it getting worse?". I called them "s
by parl_match 2y ago
> As far as I can tell, you're saying "what you're worried about is already happening, so why bother being concerned about it getting worse?".
I called them "serious problems". I don't know how you extrapolated "why bother being concerned" from "serious problems".
And my point still stands that the situation you described, is, incredibly, not only not based in reality, but also simultaneously exists through other means.
There are, of course, reasons to oppose something like this - but, the reasons you're choosing to oppose this are moot, in every feasible way.
- its_ethan 2y agoThe concern I'm raising is that this legislation opens the door for further reductions in the privacy of location. In what way is that concern not based in reality?