• Ensign Rick@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I’m all for this protection but for the sake of argument isn’t use of the service consent to begin with? Or is that the American argument around these types of regulation?

    I’m a pihole, vpn, adblock and invidious user ftr… 😂

    • TheGreatFox@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s how the corporate-written laws in the USA handle it most likely. The EU actually has some amount of consumer protection. Burying it in a 100 page terms of service document doesn’t count as consent either.

    • 0xD@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It depends on the context, but generally you require explicit permission for data-related stuff which means something like a checkbox or a signature.

    • online@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s “consent” from the POV of the law and the corporation, but I say fuck 'em. Do you really consent to everything? Did you read their ToS and Privacy Policy every time it’s amended? In the plain everyday use of the word “consent” I mean. Not in the legal constructions we’ve created.

      Thus, since I do not consent to everything in any ToS or Privacy Policy, I use adversarial tech. My use of adversarial tech is how I enforce my lack of consent to everything these platforms expect from me.

      If they don’t want us to use adversarial tech anymore, they can change their platforms so it’s no longer necessary.