Google's ToS is 16 pages with what appears to be about 50+ hyperlinks, including several hyperlinks to "additional service-specific terms" which itself has ~50 links to other terms which are all multiple pages.
Perhaps instead of pinning all of the blame on users, we could have the companies producing labyrinthian ToS contracts written by top-grade lawyers and full of legalese (that no layperson should be expected to understand) shoulder at least some of the blame?
This doesn't even touch on the fact that many topics (as related to data aggregation and privacy) are highly technical and require at least a few years of post-secondary to even begin wrapping your head around (e.g. de-anonymization via large sparse datasets is not something I can reasonably teach my 85-year old parent, nor to my child, both of which use Google services in some capacity).
But, yes... Let's blame it on Average Joe, who just wants to watch their dog for a few minutes while at work and saw an ad on TV about a convenient way to do so. Shame on them for not being both a lawyer and a CS graduate.
I don’t understand why aren’t there any standard terms of service which are generally applicable and companies can make minor adjustments to them if they can justify it
A solution to this is for courts to limit what is applicable in a ToS to a certain number of words, and have overly broad statements always favor the entity who has to agree.
This, in effect, nullifies all but the most important components of a Tos.
Due diligence is expected among a mature population. But you're right it's not entirely on individuals. There should be ways to disseminate information about the threats these products pose to personal liberty, especially in a nation that uses the word "liberty" so freely in its foundational documents.
>Due diligence is expected among a mature population.
I wholly agree.
But we're quickly approaching (and in some cases, past) the point where proper due diligence requires a 4-year post-secondary education in a related CS field, if not more.
We're talking about products that take multiple domain experts several years of collaboration to create. How is it reasonable to expect my mechanic, accountant, etc. to do their due diligence on how that product processes their data, especially when it's processed in a black-box created by several other domain experts, and their only source of information is purposefully opaque terms written by lawyers?
Eh, it's exactly what you expect from America though. Ie the embodiment of short term thinking. Economy, environment, politics, etc - not that America is entirely unique here, just that the population seems to embrace this as a foundation in my experience.
Privacy to tech like this is very hypothetical till it happens, and it'll rarely happen. If it's not in our faces we won't vote against it.
>Eh, it's exactly what you expect from America though. Ie the embodiment of short term thinking.
I think this is the entirely wrong framing. My other comment covers some of it, but specifically in regards to your comment: it's a lack of education, not the embodiment of short-term thinking.
And really, we can't expect every person that uses Google (or whatever other large tech company) to thoroughly understand all of the bits and pieces of technology that could be used to fuck them. Or how things that we've been told are anonymous/private become non-anonymous/non-private when combined with other sparse data. These are complex topics that even many technologists don't understand (or are outside of their field of expertise).
These companies hire top lawyers to write complex ToS, use as many dark-patterns as legally possible, do illegal things until they get caught doing so, evolve their terms frequently, etc. Yet somehow they've convinced everyone to blame the layperson. It's remarkable, really.
What would be really swell is if we could, you know, not have companies spend millions of dollars on how-to-fuck-your-user initiatives.
But we can't live in a world where the responsibility isn't on the individual, can we?
Ie if we expect corporations to not fuck you over, who is there to enforce that? Who has the power to keep them in check? Okay, maybe Government should hold that role - but who then keeps the government in check? Who ensures that the spying or privacy from the Government is kept in check? etc
Ultimately the buck always stops at the individual. And we have to be hyper aware of long term implications, because money, greed and power has deep, deep pockets (as you also mentioned) and the fight will be never ending.
We, as a community, have de-propritized education, health care, public safety, privacy, etc. Sure, powerful forces have been pushing for that exact thing, but we can't expect them to "just be nice" or w/e.
I'm very pro "Big Government". However my ideas behind big government will not work without individual responsibility. Until then citizens are purposefully and willfully giving their power away with every tiny step. The blame is on us, and our current state is inevitable. My 2c.
This is absolutely by design and part of a larger pattern of propaganda that keeps Americans scared of the government and in love with the idea of becoming billionaire CEOs themselves because it's "moral". That holy "free market" has rewarded those rich people for being some damn smart and efficient--they deserve it, not the damn communist free loader leftists who hate America.
That's an odd take, I honestly don't find anything about this article, or the broader topic of privacy and overreach by companies and law enforcement, amusing in any way.
Google's ToS is 16 pages with what appears to be about 50+ hyperlinks, including several hyperlinks to "additional service-specific terms" which itself has ~50 links to other terms which are all multiple pages.
Perhaps instead of pinning all of the blame on users, we could have the companies producing labyrinthian ToS contracts written by top-grade lawyers and full of legalese (that no layperson should be expected to understand) shoulder at least some of the blame?
This doesn't even touch on the fact that many topics (as related to data aggregation and privacy) are highly technical and require at least a few years of post-secondary to even begin wrapping your head around (e.g. de-anonymization via large sparse datasets is not something I can reasonably teach my 85-year old parent, nor to my child, both of which use Google services in some capacity).
But, yes... Let's blame it on Average Joe, who just wants to watch their dog for a few minutes while at work and saw an ad on TV about a convenient way to do so. Shame on them for not being both a lawyer and a CS graduate.
I don’t understand why aren’t there any standard terms of service which are generally applicable and companies can make minor adjustments to them if they can justify it
Because their in house lawyers tell them they need a custom made one.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” — Upton Sinclair
1 reply →
A solution to this is for courts to limit what is applicable in a ToS to a certain number of words, and have overly broad statements always favor the entity who has to agree.
This, in effect, nullifies all but the most important components of a Tos.
Due diligence is expected among a mature population. But you're right it's not entirely on individuals. There should be ways to disseminate information about the threats these products pose to personal liberty, especially in a nation that uses the word "liberty" so freely in its foundational documents.
>Due diligence is expected among a mature population.
I wholly agree.
But we're quickly approaching (and in some cases, past) the point where proper due diligence requires a 4-year post-secondary education in a related CS field, if not more.
We're talking about products that take multiple domain experts several years of collaboration to create. How is it reasonable to expect my mechanic, accountant, etc. to do their due diligence on how that product processes their data, especially when it's processed in a black-box created by several other domain experts, and their only source of information is purposefully opaque terms written by lawyers?
1 reply →
Eh, it's exactly what you expect from America though. Ie the embodiment of short term thinking. Economy, environment, politics, etc - not that America is entirely unique here, just that the population seems to embrace this as a foundation in my experience.
Privacy to tech like this is very hypothetical till it happens, and it'll rarely happen. If it's not in our faces we won't vote against it.
>Eh, it's exactly what you expect from America though. Ie the embodiment of short term thinking.
I think this is the entirely wrong framing. My other comment covers some of it, but specifically in regards to your comment: it's a lack of education, not the embodiment of short-term thinking.
And really, we can't expect every person that uses Google (or whatever other large tech company) to thoroughly understand all of the bits and pieces of technology that could be used to fuck them. Or how things that we've been told are anonymous/private become non-anonymous/non-private when combined with other sparse data. These are complex topics that even many technologists don't understand (or are outside of their field of expertise).
These companies hire top lawyers to write complex ToS, use as many dark-patterns as legally possible, do illegal things until they get caught doing so, evolve their terms frequently, etc. Yet somehow they've convinced everyone to blame the layperson. It's remarkable, really.
What would be really swell is if we could, you know, not have companies spend millions of dollars on how-to-fuck-your-user initiatives.
But we can't live in a world where the responsibility isn't on the individual, can we?
Ie if we expect corporations to not fuck you over, who is there to enforce that? Who has the power to keep them in check? Okay, maybe Government should hold that role - but who then keeps the government in check? Who ensures that the spying or privacy from the Government is kept in check? etc
Ultimately the buck always stops at the individual. And we have to be hyper aware of long term implications, because money, greed and power has deep, deep pockets (as you also mentioned) and the fight will be never ending.
We, as a community, have de-propritized education, health care, public safety, privacy, etc. Sure, powerful forces have been pushing for that exact thing, but we can't expect them to "just be nice" or w/e.
I'm very pro "Big Government". However my ideas behind big government will not work without individual responsibility. Until then citizens are purposefully and willfully giving their power away with every tiny step. The blame is on us, and our current state is inevitable. My 2c.
8 replies →
> it's a lack of education
This is absolutely by design and part of a larger pattern of propaganda that keeps Americans scared of the government and in love with the idea of becoming billionaire CEOs themselves because it's "moral". That holy "free market" has rewarded those rich people for being some damn smart and efficient--they deserve it, not the damn communist free loader leftists who hate America.
1 reply →
It's hilarious.
That's an odd take, I honestly don't find anything about this article, or the broader topic of privacy and overreach by companies and law enforcement, amusing in any way.