A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.96K Posts
- 74.6K Comments
- Modlog
I’m not a fan of automated data collection, regardless of the reason. I see the merit, though, but I won’t allow it. The post is very clear about the preserved anonymity of the collected data, which is good, and on how to easily opt out, which is great.
This statement, however, was a bit strange. Almost like they are being flippant on local laws. Since I know this isn’t the case here, they should have phrased it different. (Emphasis mine)
They definitely could have phrased this better. I think what they mean is that their level of confidentiality meets or exceeds local laws.
That’s what I also understood. It’s just an odd, almost incorrect, phrasing. Unless our understanding is wrong, and they actually mean that they won’t follow the local laws if said laws require them to violate privacy.