• RightEdofer@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Why would you ever give the benefit of the doubt to the largest ad company to ever exist whose entire existence and history depends on tracking user data. They literally just had too settle a lawsuit for tracking users when they said they wouldn’t in incognito mode.

    There are plenty of little hints in Android that they want to enable tracking (eg. Bluetooth and exact location permissions being linked despite there being no real need to). Y’all need Graphene yesterday. And we all need a new total alternative since Apple is quickly chomping at the bit for ad income.

    • willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Because he or she works for Google’s image and status management interests.

      Does not matter consiously or unconsciously. Does not matter paid or free. Dependent or independent. Good faith or bad. Bot or human. None of it matters.

      What matters is the result of their action/speech, and the priorities. And it is loud and clear what those are.

      “Google must be trusted and given all the information first. Then, if you can find mismanagement, try to prosecute your grievance AFTER an injury has occured and was proven.”

      ^^^ We need to flip the script here.

      Protect your iterests first. Google’s interests mean nothing to you.

      If Google can serve my interests they get paid. They don’t get freebies or deference or first dibs or ownership of the phone, or part ownership, or benefit of doubt, fucking NOTHING. They get just what they need to render a service. That’s it.

      If Google does not like that they are to serve, and instead Google’s managers have aristocratic ambitions, we need to talk.