In our new world, data has turned into a very profitable commodity traded by states, companies, hackers, and anyone else who feels like it! Could they all possibly give up this resource at once, even if you were to cut the state out by the roots? Moreover, people mostly don’t care about their personal data when visiting websites, downloading games, apps, or TikToks. In other words, it’s a kind of exchange of one’s data for convenience/benefits. I don’t think anyone’s property rights are being violated in this case. What do you think?
P.S. This question occurred to me while I was downloading a certain hyped-up Chinese game (those who know, know what I’m talking about). They wrote it right there: that you agree to let them use your account info for their own purposes. In other words, in simple language understandable to a human, and not like in other apps where everything is blurred and vague, explained as if saying, “we aren’t stealing from you, but we’ll take it somehow, and it’s better if you don’t think about it at all, ciao!”
Anal Magician
I would like to take this question as an opportunity to recommend to the reader an article in a channel with the immodest name without compromises, but with a surprisingly modest number of subscribers. However, the text of the article itself is posted on VKontakte, where the author has an order of magnitude more subscribers. There, a particular take interested me.
If one blindly honors the text of a contract with all its squiggles, reservations, and footnotes in tiny print, then the service provider has an economic incentive to cushion their own fall in the text of the agreement: the consumer will not look into the details, but the text of the agreement will significantly restrict them. However, the details of the agreement that are in plain sight must be made more attractive to the client because of competition.
But if we consider only that which was explicitly stated during the conclusion of the agreement as the contract, and treat all implicit nuances that were not discussed as merely unilateral good wishes—then an economic incentive appears to make contracts short and clear, so that the process of concluding the agreement is not burdensome for the buyer, otherwise they will go to another provider.
As we can see from the example you provided, when there is no need for legal hair-splitting, lawyers quickly switch to human language and state directly what rights they reserve. And, as we see from your reaction, the client tends to approve of such honesty. Meanwhile, it is unlikely that you would be so lenient toward a stated intention in a contract by the game developers, for example, to withdraw money from all your bank accounts or bitcoin wallets that the company manages to access. Even though, it would seem, this is also just a matter of access to data.
We live in an increasingly transparent world, which, moreover, will soon be filled with a large number of fakes indistinguishable from reality. Legal protection of personal data, privacy protection of personal life, private keys and passwords—all these are rearguard actions before full capitulation. What to do after capitulation? I wrote about this in one of my old posts titled Digital Identity.
The future is shaky, but I have a feeling that our generation has already accepted the new rules of the game in advance and isn’t particularly worried about it. As for those who, out of habit, will want to hide something, they are doomed to occasionally find themselves in an embarrassing position. Let’s wish them not to get too nervous over such blunders.
I apologize for not answering the direct question about what color underwear we will wear under ancap, and what style under minarchism. What can be done, if we will be going without underwear.
