Weird take. When it comes to trying to compel tech companies to not be evil, trying to use legal precedent for crimes you can charge them with is usually difficult and turns into a semantic debate. I think what's more important is that we recognize when people and companies abuse power to do evil things, regardless of what legal precedent or written corporate policy is relevant. These companies act exactly as evil as they can possibly get away with without pushing us to other products and services.
replyFrankly I trust the EFF more than anyone else in this situation/conversation. So I will assume there is a very clear basis.
replyI don’t know what you mean by “activism narrative” but the EFF has been fighting for your digital rights for many, many years. It reads like you consider their work disingenuous, but I can tell you from firsthand experience it is not. They deserve less skepticism than you’re giving them.
John Perry Barlow‘S EFF surely did, but are you sure you can trust Nicole Orze’s EFF to fight for your rights if one of your sympathies doesn’t align with current California’s sensibilities?
https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicoleozer
replyThis is just a link to her LinkedIn. I don’t understand what I’m supposed to be looking for.
replyShe is a lawyer from California and educated at Berkeley. What are the chances she thinks you are a Nazi for something like driving a Tesla? I bet that are much higher than zero. And since the EFF doesn’t defend “Nazis” you are out of luck.
replyYou might think I am being prejudiced, but she already dropped EFF Twitter/X account, the one with more views per post than any other social media, claiming it didn’t had enough impact.