First problem they made was vesting their trust in corporations.
Second mistake they made was believing they preserve their information and respect their privacy.>Open Source does not automatically equal safe
They aren't wrong here, an open-source application or operating system has the potential to become malicious if the individual using is does not have access to a properly conducted audit or has not conducted an audit themselves. Using closed-source software is similar to drinking soda that does not have an ingredient list or hasn't been inspected by the FDA or a third party, an individual or corporation can tell you that the soda is perfectly safe and is similar to the open-source soda with the ingredients list visible and proper inspections, but you have to very much blindly follow their advice while deep inside, you have no idea what the closed-source soda is inflicting upon your body. This soda example is good, because it is not difficult for an individual to learn what each ingredient is and how it works together to make a food, and I know FOR A FACT that there would be a massive uproar if ingredients were no longer required to be listed, there already is a growing movement to push for labeling of genetically modified foods and pesticide usage, so it baffles me that the same people who use computers with closed-source software and proprietary hardware won't fight for better software and hardware, but will fight for better food and labeling, perhaps it is a hierarchy of desires, food of course is much more vital to ones life compared to a measly computer...>They work hard to protect my information from external hackers, there have never been leaks
If it was easy for another corporation or hacker to steal users information from the company in question, they would no longer make profits selling the information heh
. There is always the potential for a leak to occur, and when it does, you are entirely defenseless against it because "AS STATED IN PARAGRAPH 19821 OF OUR TERMS OF SERVICE, WE ARE NOT LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR LOSS OF PERSONAL INFORMATION".
They will protect your information from hackers and other corporations, but not from the fucking corporations buying it from them and the damn government.>I have absolutely nothing to hide, the only people who care are schizophrenic gun-nuts who think the government is after them
Quite sad that these individuals are indirectly agreeing to be sold similar to cattle. "You use our software for free, and as payment we sell your information which you willingly give to us :^)" Nothing is free. This argument is also fucking retarded because most people HAVE committed actions that would destroy their reputation or instigate legal action if they were to be shown to the public, they would freak the fuck out if their address and personal information was posted on the front of google, and once again they would be defenseless because "When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content :^)".>They collect our information to make their services better and to cater to us, we only get the content we like to see!
This is how you subtly isolate each individual from each other, eliminate different views, cut the distribution of information, and keep individuals content so they remain docile. The inability to spend time searching for content one likes is a sign of laziness and incompetence, and refusing to adopt new views and look at content which makes you uncomfortable is ignorant.