Comments
MicroSofty88 t1_isbe55p wrote
I wouldn’t call this “personal data”. It directly relates to your use of the device and impacts user experience. Under this definition the accelerometer in your phone is capturing personal data about how your hands are oriented.
vanalla t1_isbh4ls wrote
It's data about how you're using the device. Data that, without your input, would not have been generated.
Based on that definition, it is personal data.
If I held a paintbrush in front of a rotating canvas I bought, the final product would be my intellectual property, because without my input said product wouldn't have existed. The company that made the canvas, the rotating device, or the brush are not entitled to that final product in any way.
The final product in this metaphor would be my facial expressions and eye movements.
Logical007 t1_isbiwe8 wrote
What a clickbait article.
Here’s the cliff notes: the data lives on the device for the purpose of the application and doesn’t leave the device.
CptCrabcakes t1_isbjf4v wrote
Price is also fucking insane. Not gonna spend that much on a product that is more likely than not selling my data for a profit anyway.
[deleted] t1_isblp7z wrote
[deleted]
MajorKoopa t1_isblpuc wrote
Every time you put it on, you’re just plugging into a monetized data collector. You’ve paid $1500 to become a product.
wmurch4 t1_isbm1si wrote
Omg they'll know I winked that one time! Think of the ads!
[deleted] t1_isbn7h4 wrote
[deleted]
xeno-batt t1_isboz49 wrote
It gets tedious after a while and bloody irritating too, vacuum sucked to your head like a divers mask 😉 I hardly use mine now.
Sleepy_Tortoise t1_isbpybe wrote
The accelerometer is actually sensitive enough to give a lot more data than you think. It can tell some medical info and whether you're sober or drunk when your phone is in your pocket by picking up signals in the way you walk, and some accelerometers are sensitive enough to pick up the sound vibrations of spoken conversations and discern words. This was all in a cyber security research paper and these things were actually done and proven possible. Getting permission from your phone to use this data vs microphone or camera or something more conspicuous is way easier too.
iamchairs t1_isbqeoi wrote
Facebook can't just do anything they want. Not with the regulations that have been placed on them. And their privacy/security culture is much stronger than you think.
iamchairs t1_isbrr7h wrote
Facebook does not promote divisive articles in the way you are implying. All these social media companies are playing the same game. Their algorithms help viral content achieve higher virality. The base algorithms do not care what the content is. Actually, a lot of work is done to stop the algorithm from promoting harmful content, but that often becomes a political question.
It's important to understand this. Because while it feels good to point at Facebook as "the bad guy" and call it a day. Every platform has the same problems. You are using one platform as a sacrificial lamb and turning a blind eye to problems that are apparent on all platforms.
CraftArchitect t1_isbsvne wrote
and you believing this is hilarious
BudMcLaine t1_isbtskh wrote
Its an enterprise device. It wasn't built for consumers. They never expected you to buy it.
BudMcLaine t1_isbu1kg wrote
This feature is also off by default. You have to choose to turn it on.
BudMcLaine t1_isbudou wrote
And people have known about it for just about as long. Yet there are still plenty of people using their products.
I guess nobody on here still has a FB acount, Instagram account, Whatsapp account, Giphy. /s
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isbv0li wrote
Yeah I remember when Alexa was only listening to you when you called out it's name. Turns out that's not the case but Alexa doesn't store any recordings so it should be good. Turns out that's not the case.
Facebook is absolutely going to record everything on day 1.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isbv8q1 wrote
>Their algorithms help viral content achieve higher virality.
By promoting them. So yes, Facebook does promote divisive articles to achieve higher virality. Look, just because you fancy it up, doesn't mean words have changed their meaning.
And yes, every platform has the same problem but their capability is very very small and lots of times, their capability is directly based on facebooks capability.
You could say that Facebook is the evil company that gives other companies bad ideas.
imforit t1_isbvjsu wrote
For now. It's trivial to change that later.
CptCrabcakes t1_isbvnpq wrote
Lmao, Keep sucking on zuck
iamchairs t1_isbvpgw wrote
I expected this would be your response more or less
Edit: Ah you changed your response after mine to flesh it out a bit. Keep it classy
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isbw002 wrote
If a watch can tell you if you've been in a car crash, a phones sensors can definitely get more data than you thought it could.
iamchairs t1_isbw12o wrote
Link to Cambridge Analytica scandal. Yes that was a major driver for all of the regulations put on Facebook thereafter
MorfiusX t1_isbwv7z wrote
I expected yours would be dismissive.
iamchairs t1_isbx5g2 wrote
Well the trick here is the original response was just the top one. It did not address most of what I said but picked out the one thing where I technically agreed with them if you squinted. But after my response they changed theirs. So I'm only now dismissive after the commenter edited theirs
twister55555 t1_isc1xy7 wrote
Reason #43 not to trust meta, let's see if people have actually learned and won't support the zuck
BudMcLaine t1_isc22pk wrote
I'm not sucking on anything, just stating facts. People are up in arms about the cost of a device that isn't meant for the average consumer. There's plenty of legitimate shit to be mad at Zuck about, but the cost of an enterprise gizmo ain't it.
BudMcLaine t1_isc2jlx wrote
Sure, and just like all of their other experimental features, the change will be advertised and you'll likely be givin an option to opt out like many of the other features on their devices.
The thing is, the people making a big stink about all of this are people that weren't going to buy the devices in the first place. They're just complaining to complain.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc2zx8 wrote
And how are the regulations going to stop it in the future? And what about the privacy/security culture? Did they get that culture right after the Cambridge Analytica scandal? Maybe they never had that kind of culture no matter what you think or what they say.
Best to get your head out of your ass and stop believing in lies that are easily disprovable by random people on the internet.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc37zt wrote
Well that's because unlike you, I don't make stupid arguments that are false. I know what words mean and I don't plan to sales talk my way out of bad things.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc3fx0 wrote
Funny how that works eh. Every rebuttal I have shoots down your badly constructed ideas.
iamchairs t1_isc3jgs wrote
Yes check the FTC regulation. Random people on the internet includes people who work at Meta.
iamchairs t1_isc3ohp wrote
That doesn't make sense. Touch grass
iamchairs t1_isc3v1g wrote
Sorry if the words were big
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc4fkn wrote
Oh the people responsible to creating the system that monitors us all? Let's not forget that we only found this information out because an ex employee of Cambridge Analytica spoke out.
For all we know, selling information is happening right now. FTC can't act on anything if they don't know.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc4los wrote
You first.
xeno-batt t1_isc4nfk wrote
It's ok, I misread the title, I have the Quest, and even if the new one was half price and aimed at consumers I'd avoid it. The technology is there but so is the bulk.
iamchairs t1_isc4o9l wrote
People who work at Meta would know
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc4qkx wrote
You shouldn't be sorry the words were big. You should be sorry you thought I was an idiot and easily fooled by sugared tongues.
iamchairs t1_isc4sn9 wrote
You know I can tell the first thing you do is downvote my posts. Why are you so upset?
FraustFortress t1_isc4vfh wrote
Shit stirring article…to make you scared of shit you don’t need to be scared of
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc56mp wrote
NDA says otherwise.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc58sb wrote
You don't seem to understand what the downvote represents.
iamchairs t1_isc5aeg wrote
Nah it's not misdirection. So as I explained there is a natural virality to content. The baseline for most of these algorithms is to notice when something is breaking out, and boost it further. That process is indifferent about the actual content
iamchairs t1_isc5gdc wrote
Umm... Do you realize how big Meta is? Whistle blowers are protected.
xeno-batt t1_isc5h3d wrote
It's a bit like this.......... Companies like his buy up everything, and before you know it that self stirring spoon you bought, made by some independent manufacturer who saves dolphins in Japan is bought up by the likes of Zuckerberg. Avoiding these capitalist vacuums is unavoidable unless you want to live in a tree eating berries 🍒
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc5n44 wrote
Yes and the virality is fed to people with competing ideas to rile them up and increase clicks. You're just telling me I'm wrong and then proving me right just in more words.
iamchairs t1_isc5tvn wrote
Yes it's how you bury content. But it's just you and me here and whoever is going to come after us to see where this thread leads to. At this point we are so far down and replying to each other so quickly we are essentially texting each orher. So by downvoting each of my texts as soon as you get them it seems like you are having a very emotional experience right now
iamchairs t1_isc67dq wrote
No you're still not getting it... But you keep saying that you do and it's weird
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc6a4m wrote
Hey, buddy, I'm only using the downvote because you're wrong and just won't admit it. It's my sacred duty.
BudMcLaine t1_isc6dhg wrote
With the battery on the back of the strap, the Pro at least seems like it'll be more comfortable despite being a bit heavier. All that weight on the face with Quest 1/2 can get uncomfortable without a counterweight after a while.
Imaginary-Fun-80085 t1_isc6evy wrote
Nice try.
VigilantRex t1_isc6lvg wrote
I'll downvote you both if you don't kiss right now
BudMcLaine t1_isc6tek wrote
An apt analogy! I guess I'm of the perspective of not spending my time worrying about things I can't help or change. I'm not a tech developer, I won't be creating an app to take on Meta minus all the darker shit they do. The majority of the tech world uses their products, which means I'm going to end up having to use them in certain scenarios, too.
xeno-batt t1_isc7gvs wrote
We are doomed 😉
RomanCenturian t1_iscfmfi wrote
I don’t think I’d trust Meta.
findingbezu t1_ischar2 wrote
FPOWorld t1_isciktx wrote
We all know how Facebook never lies and misuses data!
jmo1 t1_iscilza wrote
Sweet summer child
FPOWorld t1_iscisx3 wrote
Like they knew about Cambridge Analytica?
FPOWorld t1_isciw7z wrote
Just like how webcams all only turn on when the light is on? 🤔
FPOWorld t1_iscj1n1 wrote
I have 0 of these and am quite proud of it.
SlowMope t1_isck2en wrote
No. Kiss.
[deleted] t1_iscq0wu wrote
[removed]
iamchairs t1_iscr9qw wrote
In your own words can you tell me how the CA scandal was conducted? I'll wait
[deleted] t1_iscs4vi wrote
[deleted]
FPOWorld t1_iscsj1l wrote
You’ll be waiting a long time because that sentence makes little sense.
[deleted] t1_iscsm7w wrote
[deleted]
iamchairs t1_iscsw4j wrote
You can believe whatever you want. What you've written is pretty popular. But you have no idea how Meta works internally
iamchairs t1_isct193 wrote
In what way does it not make sense? Tell me how the CA scandal worked. Do you know?
[deleted] t1_isct6ez wrote
[deleted]
FPOWorld t1_isctjiy wrote
Yes. I’m a computer engineer.
iamchairs t1_isctw68 wrote
Good, and so am I. You could sum this up in a couple sentences then. But instead you are deflecting?
iamchairs t1_iscu1k1 wrote
FPOWorld t1_iscuq1v wrote
CA jacked a bunch of data illegally, Facebook knew for years and didn’t disclose what happened until after that data was used to jack the election for Trump.
Edit: if you can call it a disclosure after it only came out via whistleblower complaint
iamchairs t1_iscuvss wrote
Pretty lazy response. But not surprising based on what I've seen so far.
When you focus all of your attention on Facebook like it's the final boss then you fail to address the systemic problems all of these platforms have.
iamchairs t1_iscvjbk wrote
Yeah pretty good. So as a response to that, Meta changed a lot of policies internally, and created a strong culture around privacy/security, has active 3rd party oversight, and strict guidelines from the FTC on how it can interact with 3rd parties on user data.
americansherlock201 t1_iscvqxz wrote
Not just profit, but reach a large enough user base where the data has value. Super small user bases like those using this don’t have too much value. Millions of people using it and the data becomes much more valuable.
And for anyone wondering what this could be used for: they could track if you’re paying attention to something on screen such as in game ads to gather a value for those ads
[deleted] t1_iscw2jo wrote
[deleted]
iamchairs t1_iscxhye wrote
I've hardly gone out of my way to be pro Meta. I've been fairly neutral the whole time on Meta but I've tried to be objective.
Whenever Meta is in the news we get dozens of these threads that are all the same thing.
Whenever another platform gets caught doing something evil those threads become what-about-facebook threads and, crucially, the thing platform X was doing never actually stops but we all got a good laugh at the old zuck so it's fine.
OmNomCakes t1_iscy7r2 wrote
Gauge your audience my dude. These people have no idea how or why tech works. They likely get upset when a phone app wants permission to calls thinking it's listening to them. See the Alexa comment above, they're referencing Alexa having to listen to things that aren't Alexa to know when you say Alexa.
And if you try to explain how software works you're a 'shill'. God forbid you show them how to monitor the actual physical traffic from the devices so they can see for themselves. They'd just say the device must be hiding it!
Probably the same people that say Google ads suck because all they show them is gay porn.
OmNomCakes t1_iscydbh wrote
That's.. usually a physical circuit. Ie if current is present to turn the cam on, the light is on. Please show me a major manufacturer who has a camera that isn't this way.
[deleted] t1_iscyenu wrote
[deleted]
iamchairs t1_iscylsm wrote
Lmao you're right
OmNomCakes t1_iscyo9e wrote
Exactly. The light sensitivity on your phone can tell enough to be a major security risk if someone was malicious. The accelerometer would tell people your habits down to creepy levels. But God damn if an avatar in a game makes the faces I do AFTER I choose to turn a setting on myself. XD
FPOWorld t1_iscywk2 wrote
NOW we can trust them? This is after they secretly ran psychological experiments on users without their consent (among many other scandals). They didn’t even suspend CA from using Facebook until after the whistleblower. They knew CA broke the law and covered it up for years. They didn’t follow their own policies, were an accessory to one of the greatest crimes of my lifetime, did nothing to stop what CA did with the data, and now we can trust they’re going to start following the rules?
The rot is at the top. There’s no fixing that as long as Zuck the conqueror is running the show. I won’t give meta a goddamn dollar or a click.
iamchairs t1_isczj4y wrote
Secret psychological experiments... You mean AB tests?
> one of the greatest crimes of my lifetime
I was going to say you must be young then but even then that doesn't make sense given everything that has happened since then... You sure you got the right scandal?
iamchairs t1_iscztjx wrote
I'm just telling you how these algorithms work and what is public knowledge about Facebook and privacy policy. It's honestly pretty boring stuff. But if that's pro-Meta I don't know what is neutral. Their logo is blue... Is it like.. an evil blue?
FPOWorld t1_isd0ql2 wrote
No, I mean where they did an experiment to manipulate users’ emotions: https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/02/facebook-sorry-secret-psychological-experiment-users
Stealing a US presidential election that led to the outlawing of abortion, nationwide voter suppression, and the community spread of Covid and a million dead Americans is right up there with anything I can think of.
[deleted] t1_isd1o5m wrote
[deleted]
iamchairs t1_isd2855 wrote
Yeah so this is called an AB test. These are happening all the time. Even here on Reddit did you know your version of Reddit may be slightly different than everyone else's? It's to test to see what a tweak to the system (UI or Feed) has on your behavior. In the article you linked, the article says Facebook was tweaking the percentage of positive/negative sentiment items it let through to your feed.
Yes through the Facebook platform Trump was able to get elected when maybe he wouldn't have otherwise. But the world is too complicated to say "everything happened because of X and only X". What about the following 4 years when the republicans blocked 2 impeachments? What about all of the existing levers used by those in power? Facebook was the shiny new lever. A big one- I'm not downplaying the significance- but one of many.
iamchairs t1_isd2dci wrote
Good talk. Stay classy
FPOWorld t1_isd33r1 wrote
Do you work for Facebook?
I’m well aware of what A/B testing is, as I mentioned, I’m a computer engineer. Why did they apologize for an A/B test, which as you know is almost an industry standard practice? Finding which widget gets the most clicks is an A/B test, not inflicting sadness on users as part of a psy op.
Sure this was not the only factor, but it’s hard to argue that it wasn’t a critical one. It’s especially egregious as it was done in the process of committing a crime that FB covered up. They deserve 0 trust.
iamchairs t1_isd4u7y wrote
Because they thought it was the best way to address it most likely. Schrep says in that article that they should have used a different method to conduct the same research, not that the research itself was wrong.
[deleted] t1_isda3dc wrote
[deleted]
thefriendlycouple t1_isdk5ts wrote
Facebooks business model is to sell your personal information to anyone that will pay for it. Why on Earth would you let a company like this into your digital life?
LTareyouserious t1_isdp3q3 wrote
You looked at x ad longer than 2 seconds, cataloged as relevant / effective, ad revenue criteria met. Ad slightly modified to be slightly more blue next time, eye time 2.3s, more ad revenue. All future ads now with more blue. ad y shows up, 4 seconds. Double the frequency of ad y, more ad revenue. ad y blue-purple, down to 3.8s. Back to more blue for more ad revenue.
puffmaster5000 t1_isdqtcz wrote
Sure it does, even if that's true that only for right now. And still even if it never leaves the device they can still use that data to build profiles and force you to watch ads
puffmaster5000 t1_isdqvk3 wrote
Lol if you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you
Biscuits4u2 t1_isdrf68 wrote
Yeah, sure pal.
Biscuits4u2 t1_isdrha1 wrote
Yep. And cops use Alexa data all the time in their investigations.
Biscuits4u2 t1_isdrnnw wrote
You can't really know that's true without detailed schematics, which you ain't gonna get from most webcam mfgs.
OmNomCakes t1_isdsmea wrote
Hear me out. Go to Google and type in "logitech webcam schematic" and click on Datasheet Archives or any of the other top links and tell me what you find. Or go ahead and get real fancy and put in a filetype:pdf on there.
​
You can find Apple schematics online with the click of a button. You think basic ass webcam schematics aren't online?
​
​
WITH THAT BEING SAID, it is also ridiculously easy to understand a webcam circuit board even without the diagrams... Just because you do not understand how the board works and think it's complex does not mean everyone shares your dilemma.
OmNomCakes t1_isdsv93 wrote
That's in the same way they submit a request to Google for your search history. If you say "Alexa how do I poison a dog" it's the same as Googling "How do I poison a dog".
It's not like the Police are asking Amazon to pull up secret recordings of you at 4AM as you take a taco bell shit. Lol
Biscuits4u2 t1_isdsy5c wrote
I don't have a dilemma. In fact I really DGAF. I use webcams daily for work. What I was saying is you can't say that for EVERY webcam mfg. You speak confidently but you just don't know.
Biscuits4u2 t1_isdt7zf wrote
There have been numerous cases where actual audio recordings from Alexa were used in police investigations. That's different from just getting a warrant for your search history. Do with that information what you want.
OmNomCakes t1_isdtut9 wrote
Hence why I said "send me one that doesn't". Any major brand name one does. Maybe there's some East Asian knock off that doesn't, which would be interesting. I'd be interested to see exactly what it does try to do.
​
It's the same as people going "Yer lightbulb connects to Chiner!" Like yeah, it absolutely does. If you put a packet filter set up to monitor the /16 on your firewall / router you'll see that it reaches out with its firmware version and checks for updates.
​
Just because something 'can be spooky' does not mean that it 'is spooky' and assuming it is without doing due diligence is just silly. But hey, it's the internet, so it's more misinformation than information these days.
cookiecoookie t1_isdwggy wrote
It leaves the device when it goes to the application for one, who knows what happens in between or in the application itself...
[deleted] t1_ise03ga wrote
[removed]
Live-Stress-9147 t1_ise0cjr wrote
Who cares
RedPillForTheShill t1_ise0dra wrote
What’s the problem? Do you prefer an ad that pleases you or an ad that doesn’t? This is no different from staring at ads on your phone.
If your problem is ads altogether, my question is, do you want everything paywalled instead?
Neo_Techni t1_ise4yp6 wrote
Yes, he admits that. He already has that information
I'm reminded of how people got mad that Pizza Pizza helped the police, not realizing it was an instead where they helped get a mob off the streets that was shooting people. I WANT Pizza Pizza saving lives like that
bitviper88 t1_isebjv9 wrote
at this point I think we should assume that anything facebook puts out with a camera is spying on you, given the awful track record of theirs when it comes to privacy
thenerdal t1_isemf8y wrote
It'll be easy to prove if so.
Fantastic-Drive-9959 t1_isfj6a1 wrote
I love my Meta Quest. My favorite piece of tech that I’ve bought in years. It’s unreal!
Liet-Kinda t1_isfzj8r wrote
Fuck, and I cannot emphasize this enough, all this bullshit
Liet-Kinda t1_isfzlfx wrote
Yet. That you know of. That they’ll admit to.
BruceBanning t1_ishbg10 wrote
Eye and face tracking will be crucial to advanced VR/AR. It can also be used for very bad things. Like showing you a grid of pictures and finding out what weird shit you’re into. You keep looking at butts in VR chat? A particular type of character?Profiled. Sold.
That’s why Meta/Facebook/Zuckerberg is the last entity you want to fuck around with.
BruceBanning t1_ishbkfy wrote
The raw data is useless. What that data tells the algorithms is the danger, and that’s what will be sold.
[deleted] t1_ishg72s wrote
[deleted]
OmNomCakes t1_ishoq0e wrote
I honestly don't use and hate Facebook. That's beside the point. The second anyone has a different opinion than you they MUST be a shill. God forbid someone see things differently or know more than you. I assume it's a defense mechanism to protect your ego.
[deleted] t1_isi3mql wrote
[deleted]
OmNomCakes t1_isi6ql8 wrote
See, there goes that ego again. Gotta try to make yourself feel and believe you're better than everyone else. Gotta try to talk down to everyone else. What an alpha.
​
Can you imagine someone keeping their same opinion throughout one whole thread over one whole day? And not saying things off subject?! The nerve. Oh well, I guess if the guy only talks about Facebook in a post about Facebook and doesn't concede to your beliefs he must be a shill. The guy posts plenty of shit that isn't pro-facebook related, and most of his comments here aren't facebook related but general tech, software, and hardware related.
​
But I'm going to go ahead and block you so you can get over it and go back to your closed minded better-than-thou mentality.
[deleted] t1_isi7nck wrote
[deleted]
zekex944resurrection t1_isib1vm wrote
Yeah hard pass on that. Plus apple’s gonna have a better product and it will likely be more compact.
what595654 t1_iskpydq wrote
Sure. But, this is still a clickbait article created to insight reactions and divide lines. Meta makes amazing headsets, is pushing VR/AR more than any other company in history. And yet, I dont like their business model.
what595654 t1_iskq3zk wrote
Force you to watch ads? You mean like A Clockwork Orange? I think that is illegal.
what595654 t1_iskr639 wrote
Umm. We have been the product for many years now, across many devices. Choose your poison. If the tech is something you are interested, you might as well use it. Life is too short to deprive yourself of the things you want to have. But, by all means, if you can do without, then do.
what595654 t1_iskrojx wrote
That is actually not true. This is just a premium consumer and business headset. This has been confirmed by Meta themselves.
puffmaster5000 t1_isksvbr wrote
How would it be illegal
what595654 t1_iskvf8e wrote
Because it would be assault.
puffmaster5000 t1_ismoabs wrote
You do realize the headset doesn't lock it's self to your face, you can take it off at any time
FitFaithlessness2047 t1_ispq0pg wrote
Nah this is fine. The 4 cameras could see you master baiting for 6 years. This ain’t that bad.
karangoswamikenz t1_isqkd33 wrote
I ain’t ever buying this shit lmao.
karangoswamikenz t1_isqki9x wrote
His whole idea for making it was to stalk photos of girls in his college. This was the whole fuckin idea. It was an incel creation after he failed on a date. People wonder why it’s so invasive.
TheQuarantinian t1_istxz10 wrote
Impossible - absolutely literally impossible - because unless you deny people the right to agree to things they will always accept the terms that waive the law.
Plus the companies will just ignore it anyway: they ignore rules and laws regarding OSHA, anti-trust, overtime/tip laws, money laundering, environmental, corporate espionage, harassment and discrimination, taxes, inspections, kickbacks and bribes, and insider trading, but they will give up hundreds of billions of potential profits because this new law gets passed? And the government will actually enforce this one?
TheQuarantinian t1_istyrui wrote
From an IM exchange with Zuckerberg in 2004
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask.
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks.
outragedUSAcitizen t1_it18ija wrote
They can still use algorithms on the data to extrapolate and make a signature of your face/eyes while you do certain things in game or browse the web.
The_Bep_Bep_Bird t1_itdoa2n wrote
Are you new to all of this?
AutoModerator t1_isb8he8 wrote
We have multiple giveaways running!
Phone 14 Pro & Ugreen Nexode 140W chargers Giveaway!
WOWCube® Entertainment System!
reMarkable 2 next generation electronic paper tablet giveaway!
Hohem Go AI-powered Tracking Smartphone Holder Giveaway!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.