• TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 days ago

    Firefox, Plex, and VPNs I can understand being surprised about. But the rest of them… I mean of course they were going to milk you for money. Was there ever a time when any of those didn’t?

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      23 days ago

      Betterhelp is a mental health therapy service. It’s not exactly unreasonable for someone who doesn’t know the company to think that their THERAPIST won’t leak and sell their info.

      Talk about exacerbating trust issues!

      • then_three_more@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 days ago

        Plus it’s not free. So the assumption would be that they’re making their momey by charging the therapist a service charge.

  • axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Firefox? Aren’t they just getting anonymous telemetry and setting the default search engine to Google? I know they changed their TOS in the past but how are they selling data?

    • slazer2au@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 days ago

      Mozilla purchased an advertisement company and a fair chunk of the board of Mozilla are ex google.

        • brendansimms@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 days ago

          Yes, they hold the user data (supposedly its all generic, non-personally identifiable, and they dont build user profiles) and then have advertisers pay them to push targeted ads based on that data. This is how the tech companies make boatloads of cash - force advertisers to pay for a subscription to use the user data for targeted ads.

        • TimeNaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          Morally grey is an interesting way to put it. He’s a murderous sociopath and drug kingpin.

          • Fleur_@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            Sure but he murdered and built a drug empire with the purpose of succeeding from an oligarchic police state.

            My interpretation of silco’s character arc is that by the end of season one he has become what vander was at the start of season one in the flashbacks. He’d fought and he knows he can win, to get all that he’s ever wanted but in doing so he will lose the people he loves. When he sits at vanders statue lamenting his death and the decision he has to make he finally understands vander and on his deathbed he admits to jinx that he would’ve chosen to become vander. Perhaps if granted the time that vander was he’d become just like the way we see vander. The season 2 alternate timeline shows that silco is capable of being the man that vander was.

            What I find more interesting is that if we accept that silco could’ve become like vander maybe before the events of the story vander was more like silco. His nickname was “hound of the underworld” hardly the name of someone “good.” Moreover one of the things silco is most criticised for is killing vander, but vander attempted to kill silco long before he did and silco also expressed guilt for his actions as vander did.

            Silco and vander are the same they’re just out of sync, vander a decade or so ahead of silco. Vander’s past catches up to him in the form of silco and silco’s future reveals itself in the form of vander. Both men are tired of the material conditions they are subjected to and both are willing to kill for change. When it came to losing the people they cared most about, to losing their daughters, both men backed down.

            All of the characters in arcane are morally grey. You can disagree with what they do, but everyone is motivated by their love for the people they care about.

  • Onions Sliced Thin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    If you’re getting something for free, you aren’t the consumer, you are the product. Open Source projects (free as in speech) need some way to pay for the beer (not free). Enshittification is accelerating the conversion of services that have some form of free tier into more aggressively finding ways to monetize those users. Even services you pay for are selling your data, to make sure they can get maximum juice.

    • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      Wrong. You are the product anyway, believing the majority of companies would not monetarize you because they made you pay first is very naive.

    • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      Nope. Amazon Prime, YouTube Premium, Netflix, etc. will all still track your behaviour, collect your data to be used against you, and still make you the product.

      Corporate greed and enshittification have ruined everything.

    • Korne127@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      Nah, there are good open source projects that are free because people think it’s important for them to be. Many of us probably also contributed to some, helping good things to be free.