Comment

Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy

You have the right to not own a car. But if you do, you must have insurance for it (in Germany, at least). You cannot hide behind GDPR and say “I have a right to my data. I must not be asked to give it to any insurer without my consent.” You also need to have a driver’s license with your name and photo on it. GDPR doesn’t protect you there, either.

The bottom line is: Using a product may come with responsibilities or other concessions. You have the right to not use the product if the concessions aren’t worth it to you. You do not have the right to any product if you refuse the obligations that come with it.

This is, of course, my own opinion based on my understanding of how the world should work.

source

Sort:hotnew top

BolexForSoup@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
They can’t assign any concessions they wants that’s the entire point.

source
- bleistift2@feddit.de ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  I mean dude you’re defending Meta, arguably the single worst company when it comes to respecting user data and privacy
  
  That’s argumentum ad hominem. If the law means what you think it means, it applies whether we’re talking about EvilCorp or SaveTheWhaleChildrenBeeFluff.
  
  Also recall the very first thing I said on this topic:
  
  I’m all for GDPR and really enjoy its protections, but I don’t understand this one.
  
  I’m playing devil’s advocate in order to gain insight, because I have no clue how this board reaches its conclusions.
  
  source
  - BolexForSoup@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    I’m playing Devil’s advocate
    
    Don’t it’s obnoxious.
    
    source
0x0@programming.dev ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Oh, by the way… you have all those rights, but from now on you can only have them if you pay 10$/mo, otherwise we’ll take it upon ourselves to switching on all telemetry and cameras in your car and pass that data on to insurers and others.

Actually… it doesn’t even qualify as analogy, more like premonition.

source