61–70 of 178 posts
The richest tech companies and richest men in the world got rich by invading people's privacy and selling invasive ads.
The richest tech companies and richest men in the world got rich by invading people's privacy and selling invasive ads.
They got rich because people were stupid enough to think free services come without a cost.
It should be illegal to send the data, and illegal to accept it; burn both sides of that bridge.
At least make it an explicitly protected right to lie about your race in any context. It's a lot easier to ruin a dataset than it is to hide from it.
I’m more annoyed that these government healthcare marketplaces are asking people their race in the first place. Really don’t think anything should be, including job applications.
Why those questions, but no Danish vs non Danish, and so on?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that even possible in the US anymore with donations and corporate backing being so important to a campaign?
I don't believe donations or corporate backing had anything to do with Trump, for example, winning. Trump won because he genuinely appeals to the average voting American. American voters are willingly choosing to support these politicians and all of the consequences that entails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be surprised if both are illegal. But these days, the correlation between "X is illegal" and "larger org's do not do X" just ain't what it yousta be.
My understanding is that it's legal with opt-in, but the opt-in is allowed to be confusing, opaque, and sticky, so most people "consent" without informed consideration. We really need to revisit contract law in a modern context. Call me crazy but I don't think it's reasonable that our society operates in such a way that easily 90+% of people are subject to contract terms they signed but don't know or understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would politicians ever pass such a law? Who do you think they work for? update: Yeah, my bad. The point of this comment was to express my increasing cynicism at how we just keep seeing this kind of corporate behavior over and over again and how even when a tiny win is achieved on things like data collection, right to repair, ease for cancelling subscriptions, privacy, and so on and so on, they are so quickly over…
What's the point of this kind of comment? Have pro-citizen anti-corporate laws never been passed in the past?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would politicians ever pass such a law? Who do you think they work for? update: Yeah, my bad. The point of this comment was to express my increasing cynicism at how we just keep seeing this kind of corporate behavior over and over again and how even when a tiny win is achieved on things like data collection, right to repair, ease for cancelling subscriptions, privacy, and so on and so on, they are so quickly over…
What's the point of this kind of comment? Have pro-citizen anti-corporate laws never been passed in the past?
We need to overturn CU if we want to be able to go back to a world where government serves people rather than multinational conglomerates.