It very much might be an either/or situation for many, even if it's not in all the cases.
TheEntity
joined 1 year ago
It’s still fake. But if it looks like a person in real life, what difference does the distinction make?
I'm pretty sure there is a quite a difference between an actual human being abused and a victimless depiction of such act. Not unlike watching a violent movie. Such people obviously still need help and treatment, but to me it seems vastly better than the alternative.
Let me rephrase to avoid this hyperbole. I mean that the users are presented with two options: one being pretty much bonkers and one being agreeing to the terms. FB was seemingly unwilling to make it a clear yes/no question it is (or should be according to GDPR) everywhere else and decided this manipulation is much more likely to get them the "yes" answers.
EU recently accused them of not asking for data processing consent properly. This seems to be their response.
And same here, mate. No FB in sight for me either.
It's not about getting people to pay. It's about coercing them into giving their explicit consent. Yes, "coercing" and "consent" in the same sentence, let that sink in.
Yes, let's willingly give Google even more control over our data, that's a great idea.
Considering how every single video description is already one giant ad these days, maybe the creators need to chill with their ads.
Why buy premium then?
What about other email providers?
We get it Elon, your X has left you.
Is this even a problem? Elon can keep his fringe groups and trollbots, I don't mind.
Back at you. We're both speculating.