Skip to content

Comment on US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phonesparent

Comments

To them, the consent is using the device/service/whatever.

You see it in various bits of EULA and ToS all the time. "Continued use of <insert thing here> implies agreement with the license terms".

Now, is that at all feasible when you need a smartphone to do things like pay for parking in cities or to read menus at restaurants? No. Do the people in SV who think this way also try to wedge their products and services in every single nook, cranny, and crevice of our lives as a way to increase their net worth? Yes. Is this indicative that these people have severe antisocial or sociopathic tendencies that we, as a society, need to handle? I'm not a psychologist.

To them, the consent is using the device/service/whatever.

exactly. the problem is the missing qualifying word.

when consumers say consent, it's almost always referring to informed consent.

when companies say consent, it's almost always referring to implied consent.

What's their excuse with Flock-like surveillance? Leaving the house is consent to their tracking. Let's be real: they don't value consent in any form.

I wouldn't be surprised one of those big-tech product managers gets tried for not understanding sexual consent either.

Well, at least with Flock, "Your elected leaders voted to enter the municipality into the contract."

For the other part, well, them being tried would require them to be in a jurisdiction where the local prosecutor actually has the courage to do his or her job.

I use the internet, and Facebook think thats consent.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.