How did we, as gamers, let this happen? The #Epic Games Store made an attempt to become the best gaming platform on PC by allowing #crypto games. How has tha...
you cannot reasonably do that without acknowledging that a) most people don’t read the T&C’s, and b) I said that it was “basically spyware”, implying that it isn’t exactly spyware.
GOG’s data collection functionality isn’t as extensive as Epic’s or EA’s. I also originally said “most publishers”.
Which is why I didn’t say it was exactly spyware. It’s incredibly similar, so much so that as far as the user might be concerned it effectively is spyware. Thus, it is “basically spyware”.
You’re being pedantic in a meaningless and pointless way. You’re not even technically correct, as I already covered that technicality with my first statement.
Lmfao ad hominem doesn’t mean what you apparently think it means. Again, you should read more carefully, because I didn’t even call you an asshole - I said you were acting like one, after detailing the exact behaviour I was criticising.
I’ve not been vague, either. I’ve been very detailed and specific. If anything, I should try to be more concise.
Yes, it is pretty much industry standard. That doesn’t mean it is right or acceptable. Data collection is a big problem all over - value is being taken from every one of us with no due consideration (ie payment). We’re led to believe that our data is near worthless, so much so it isn’t worth the hassle of getting paid, but this is a lie told to us by the very companies that collect it for free and make enough profit from it to become some of the wealthiest businesses in the world. And that’s not something I’ve heard on the internet, those are my own thoughts on the matter.
In any case, I’m off out now, so I’m happy to leave it as we agree to disagree.
Your payment is free use of the apps, these things aren’t free to operate.
That’s not the deal that’s offered. The two things are separate, it is not a straightforward exchange. They make out to customers that it’s like a payment, when in reality it isn’t, per the wording of their contract. If it was it would be proportional, and what they take would be front and centre instead of tucked away hidden in the terms, which themselves obfuscate the full extent of what they’re collecting.
and I’m guessing
There’s your problem. You’re using their numbers and jumping to the easy conclusion they’re directing you towards. Furthermore, the data they collect has far more value than just advertising.
And even if it was pennies a year, that’s still value that every one of us is owed. They operate in this weird niche, where they know that if they paid a fair price for user data they wouldn’t be able to raise their product price in line, so their profits would go down. But the only reason they’re profiting so much is because that extra value rightfully belongs to the person who created the data.
The person who makes nuts and bolts doesn’t know how to build everything with it, yet you can’t build a car without paying for the nuts and bolts. They aren’t paying for our nuts and bolts.
Where did I mention content creators? I’m talking about user data. Users are the creators of the data, businesses just collect it, they do not create it.
That isn’t the deal presented. An ordinary deal is “you give me x, I give you y” and then everything else is in the terms and conditions. This is like “come in for free!” and then everything is tucked away in the terms and conditions. It’s deceptive from the outset.
To take an example of how this is wrong, with insurance courts have ruled that they must have a “key facts” page at the front of the policy, giving an overview of the key limitations and what they expect. Websites do not do this. Obviously the courts haven’t yet ruled like this for websites (the cookie splash screen does not explain things in plain English), but then it always takes a long time for law to catch up with what is objectively “right”, if they ever do.
The data collection that websites do is objectively wrong, and flies in the face of the core principles of contract law, on which all trading is based.
What’s truly baffling is why you support having value taken from you.
Edit: Also, I feel the need to point out the difference in tone from each of us trying to end the conversation. I offered an olive branch, to meet in the middle, meanwhile you did it in a an obnoxious and shitty way. So again, I’m not calling you an asshole, but you sure as hell behave like one.
You didn’t even read my comment, did you.
GOG’s data collection functionality isn’t as extensive as Epic’s or EA’s. I also originally said “most publishers”.
Learn to fucking read.
deleted by creator
Which is why I didn’t say it was exactly spyware. It’s incredibly similar, so much so that as far as the user might be concerned it effectively is spyware. Thus, it is “basically spyware”.
You’re being pedantic in a meaningless and pointless way. You’re not even technically correct, as I already covered that technicality with my first statement.
deleted by creator
Lmfao ad hominem doesn’t mean what you apparently think it means. Again, you should read more carefully, because I didn’t even call you an asshole - I said you were acting like one, after detailing the exact behaviour I was criticising.
I’ve not been vague, either. I’ve been very detailed and specific. If anything, I should try to be more concise.
Yes, it is pretty much industry standard. That doesn’t mean it is right or acceptable. Data collection is a big problem all over - value is being taken from every one of us with no due consideration (ie payment). We’re led to believe that our data is near worthless, so much so it isn’t worth the hassle of getting paid, but this is a lie told to us by the very companies that collect it for free and make enough profit from it to become some of the wealthiest businesses in the world. And that’s not something I’ve heard on the internet, those are my own thoughts on the matter.
In any case, I’m off out now, so I’m happy to leave it as we agree to disagree.
deleted by creator
That’s not the deal that’s offered. The two things are separate, it is not a straightforward exchange. They make out to customers that it’s like a payment, when in reality it isn’t, per the wording of their contract. If it was it would be proportional, and what they take would be front and centre instead of tucked away hidden in the terms, which themselves obfuscate the full extent of what they’re collecting.
There’s your problem. You’re using their numbers and jumping to the easy conclusion they’re directing you towards. Furthermore, the data they collect has far more value than just advertising.
And even if it was pennies a year, that’s still value that every one of us is owed. They operate in this weird niche, where they know that if they paid a fair price for user data they wouldn’t be able to raise their product price in line, so their profits would go down. But the only reason they’re profiting so much is because that extra value rightfully belongs to the person who created the data.
The person who makes nuts and bolts doesn’t know how to build everything with it, yet you can’t build a car without paying for the nuts and bolts. They aren’t paying for our nuts and bolts.
deleted by creator
Where did I mention content creators? I’m talking about user data. Users are the creators of the data, businesses just collect it, they do not create it.
That isn’t the deal presented. An ordinary deal is “you give me x, I give you y” and then everything else is in the terms and conditions. This is like “come in for free!” and then everything is tucked away in the terms and conditions. It’s deceptive from the outset.
To take an example of how this is wrong, with insurance courts have ruled that they must have a “key facts” page at the front of the policy, giving an overview of the key limitations and what they expect. Websites do not do this. Obviously the courts haven’t yet ruled like this for websites (the cookie splash screen does not explain things in plain English), but then it always takes a long time for law to catch up with what is objectively “right”, if they ever do.
The data collection that websites do is objectively wrong, and flies in the face of the core principles of contract law, on which all trading is based.
What’s truly baffling is why you support having value taken from you.
Edit: Also, I feel the need to point out the difference in tone from each of us trying to end the conversation. I offered an olive branch, to meet in the middle, meanwhile you did it in a an obnoxious and shitty way. So again, I’m not calling you an asshole, but you sure as hell behave like one.
It only isnt spyware if youre an idiot or an epic games employee.
Which one are you?
deleted by creator
Im barack obama, and thats very obviously a lie.
deleted by creator
You were given a binary choice and you failed to provide the binary answer options.
You also apparently cant tell what a rhetorical question is.
Someone in tech security wouldnt fuck both those easy hurdles
You also arent using the right definition of spyware, so…
deleted by creator
Aww, babys first rhetorical question. You wanna see how you answer it?
Drum roll… You dont!
Glad to teach you something the rest of us learned in high school lit, maybe next you can learn what spyware is?