4 ms·

It's an intentional tactic. You accuse someone else of what you are doing so when the complaints and accusation come out that you're doing it, people already ha

by burnte 2y ago

It's an intentional tactic. You accuse someone else of what you are doing so when the complaints and accusation come out that you're doing it, people already have decided either it doesn't matter/just finger pointing, or "well, looks like everyone is doing it." It's an inoculation against future accusations.

atoav 2y ago
Do you think banks should publish your account balance? I think there would be nothing wrong with it.
- doctorpangloss 2y ago
  Are promises that are not kept, but related to politics, more important than other promises like whether or not your Etsy product is hand made?
- burnte 2y ago
  I'm not defending the policy, I think it's abhorrent. No company should be allowed to share identifiable data without the customer's consent.
more_corn 2y ago
Cool, I hear you. It’s possible and even common for someone who commits an offense to accuse his opponents of the same offense. Now respond to the real report that gun manufacturers sold your information (I’m assuming you own a gun and registered the warranty) for lobbying purposes. You pissed off at that at all? It does seem like a violation of your privacy. Maybe we should push our representatives to pass a law prohibiting that sort of shit. We do still live in a democracy for the time being.
- jerf 2y ago
  If this paragraph is accurate: "A ProPublica review of dozens of warranty cards from the 1970s through today found that some promised customers their information would be kept strictly confidential. Others said some information could be shared with third parties for marketing and sales. None of the cards informed buyers their details would be used by lobbyists and consultants to win elections." then no law is needed. That's already going to be a civil offense, it's going to be one that can be moved to a class action lawsuit, and given the political nature of the target, you can rest assured that it will be a class action lawsuit from someone. It may also be criminal, which I don't know because guessing what is and is not "criminal" is pretty hard nowadays, but this is certainly a civil infraction given the text of that paragraph. You might not hear about any results until 2026 or 2027, because that stuff is slow. But even if this wasn't already submarine PR on its own terms [1], it would be sufficient to spark a rush by class action law firms to find a representative client and get the suit filed before anyone else does. [1]: https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- burnte 2y ago
  I think it's a terrible policy and were I a gun buyer I'd absolutely let those companies know I wont' support their brands until they stop. I'd even think about starting a class-action for invasion of privacy.

by burnte 2y ago

atoav 2y ago

Do you think banks should publish your account balance? I think there would be nothing wrong with it.

doctorpangloss 2y ago
Are promises that are not kept, but related to politics, more important than other promises like whether or not your Etsy product is hand made?
burnte 2y ago
I'm not defending the policy, I think it's abhorrent. No company should be allowed to share identifiable data without the customer's consent.

more_corn 2y ago

Cool, I hear you. It’s possible and even common for someone who commits an offense to accuse his opponents of the same offense. Now respond to the real report that gun manufacturers sold your information (I’m assuming you own a gun and registered the warranty) for lobbying purposes. You pissed off at that at all? It does seem like a violation of your privacy. Maybe we should push our representatives to pass a law prohibiting that sort of shit. We do still live in a democracy for the time being.

jerf 2y ago
If this paragraph is accurate: "A ProPublica review of dozens of warranty cards from the 1970s through today found that some promised customers their information would be kept strictly confidential. Others said some information could be shared with third parties for marketing and sales. None of the cards informed buyers their details would be used by lobbyists and consultants to win elections." then no law is needed. That's already going to be a civil offense, it's going to be one that can be moved to a class action lawsuit, and given the political nature of the target, you can rest assured that it will be a class action lawsuit from someone. It may also be criminal, which I don't know because guessing what is and is not "criminal" is pretty hard nowadays, but this is certainly a civil infraction given the text of that paragraph. You might not hear about any results until 2026 or 2027, because that stuff is slow. But even if this wasn't already submarine PR on its own terms [1], it would be sufficient to spark a rush by class action law firms to find a representative client and get the suit filed before anyone else does. [1]: https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
burnte 2y ago
I think it's a terrible policy and were I a gun buyer I'd absolutely let those companies know I wont' support their brands until they stop. I'd even think about starting a class-action for invasion of privacy.