This changes nothing. This happens so often when this kind of change is introduced. It generates a lot of backlash, then they postpone the change until people's concerns have moved to something else, and reintroduce the exact same change.
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2021
30 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
35689 readers
312 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Overton window strategy
And later on they'll likely use different words to convince people it is not the same change, but it will do the exact same thing.
And they have done it already once with WhatsApp: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/technology/whatsapp-data.html
Yes, when Facebook made major changes to WhatsApp privacy policies in 2016, there was a brief moment of choice. People could check a box to order Facebook not to use their data from WhatsApp for commercial purposes.
Facebook would still collect the data from WhatsApp users, as I explained above, but the company would not use the data to “improve its ads and product experiences,” like making friend recommendations.
But that option in WhatsApp existed for only 30 days in 2016. That was a lifetime ago in digital years, and approximately four million Facebook data scandals ago.
Exactly.
WhatsApp hurt itself in confusion!
Could you please try to avoid posting privacy-invading links about privacy-related issues? The only way I know to get around Engadget's redirect tracking is to either block the site it redirects to, which effectively blocks Engadget entirely, or to auto-delete cookies, which makes the tracking temporary but also messes with other sites where cookies are actually needed.
Okay, what if I use Archive.is for archived copies instead?
Yeah, that works great. Thanks!
Thank you for that proposal.
Giving user more time, as in waiting for a couple of weeks until this blows off and then doing it again, but incrementally over the span of two or three months. Just move away from whatsapp folks.
This tactic is so common. Indian government said there was a lot of "misinformation" and "confusion" around the new farm laws without, as in this case, trying to clear said "misinformation" and "confusion".