this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
912 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3394 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Forcing the company to be liable for the data they collect would be more likely to stop them from doing it than trying to outlaw them collecting it

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No it wouldn't because poor people can trivially be kept out of court all kinds of ways from binding arbitration to half assed enforcement. As a rule if you want someone to NOT do something you have to tell them they can't do it!

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No it wouldn’t because elected officials don’t represent poor people

But we’re talking about buying new BMWs anyway. Your logic was just too stupid to not laugh at

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The problem is there is no reason to suspect that a lucrative strategy doesn't spread to other manufacturers and indeed segments.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And it will be long established before it effects the poor

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 months ago

So your previous argument was nonsense