Today I filed a formal complaint against #YouTube with the Irish Data Protection Commissioner for their illegal deployment of #adblock detection technologies.
Under Article 5(3) of 2002/58/EC YouTube are legally obligated to obtain consent before storing or accessing information already stored on an end user's terminal equipment unless it is strictly necessary for the provisions of the requested service.
In 2016 the EU Commission confirmed in writing that adblock detection requires consent.
My argument for that is “yesterday I ate some salad”. It’s just as relevant to what you just said because once again, it has nothing to do with what’s being said.
The whole chain of conversation is about immorality, and you talk about illegality. They are orthogonal concepts. They have nothing to do with one another.
So something legal is moral, and something illegal is immoral? That’s your mature vision of things since you’re trying as hard as you can to link both?
Then I guess civil forfeiture is moral, but driving 1km/h above the speed limit is immoral then… /s
Also, you’re trying to fish for any makeshift argument you can muster, even if they’re bad. If you just look at the basic situation: someone is asking X to provide Y. You’re not willing to pay X to get Y. Taking Y from them without paying X is immoral, period. We’re not talking about an essential good that only them can provide. It’s not about insulin being 800$. (Which is legal, so I guess by your definition it’s moral…)
Its cute that the salad guy thinks he can reason out a conversation.
Its not immoral to violate an illegal requirement. Especially when they are already fully paid in my data. Do you need an adult to explain that to you? Im not paid to tutor kids, but Im sure you can ask your mother to hire someone.
Since you have no actual arguments, and are just resorting to insulting times and again (and can’t understand that illegal and immoral have no link to one another…) I’ll just move on.
My argument for that is “yesterday I ate some salad”. It’s just as relevant to what you just said because once again, it has nothing to do with what’s being said.
Thats such an incoherent response.
If you think it had nothing to do with the convo, maybe you shouldnt be chiming in on adult conversations until you can follow them.
The whole chain of conversation is about immorality, and you talk about illegality. They are orthogonal concepts. They have nothing to do with one another.
If a company is writing illegal requirements, there is no moral backing for following them. They arent allowed to ask it of you.
Go get your sippie and blankie. This conversation is too mature for you to handle.
So something legal is moral, and something illegal is immoral? That’s your mature vision of things since you’re trying as hard as you can to link both?
Then I guess civil forfeiture is moral, but driving 1km/h above the speed limit is immoral then… /s
Also, you’re trying to fish for any makeshift argument you can muster, even if they’re bad. If you just look at the basic situation: someone is asking X to provide Y. You’re not willing to pay X to get Y. Taking Y from them without paying X is immoral, period. We’re not talking about an essential good that only them can provide. It’s not about insulin being 800$. (Which is legal, so I guess by your definition it’s moral…)
Its cute that the salad guy thinks he can reason out a conversation.
Its not immoral to violate an illegal requirement. Especially when they are already fully paid in my data. Do you need an adult to explain that to you? Im not paid to tutor kids, but Im sure you can ask your mother to hire someone.
Since you have no actual arguments, and are just resorting to insulting times and again (and can’t understand that illegal and immoral have no link to one another…) I’ll just move on.
What arguments could you engage with? Im not debating ideal lettuce to ranch ratios.