While I do agree its a bit whack, I question if everything needs 100% safety to be legal?
If someone offers a dangerous thing and you sign a waiver, maybe motocross, if you get injured is it the owners fault? Why should an individual be free from onus?
New Zealand understands this, you can sign away a companies liability to yourself. For adventure tourism stuff mostly. It’s a good and fair way to do things I think.
“The fuck else were these people expecting” is also my visceral reaction whenever shit like that happens, but if I think about for a bit longer, I realize that it’s not much different than saying “The fuck else were you expecting” to a rape victim who went alone into a dark alley. Sure, people are stupid for engaging with this obvious scam, but the bad guy is still the scammer, not the victims.
I don’t think it is reasonable to expect every individual to become a privacy / legal expert. I think people should have reasonable protections and assurances given to them without needing to study the details of everything they do on a case-by-case basis.
We have laws about what food can and cannot be sold - so that individuals don’t have to personally test and monitor every product for safety. Privacy & data could be done like that too.
I don’t agree with that at all, if you don’t or can’t understand the terms of a contract, you sign at your own peril, expecting the government to step in everytime a person decides to excercise their stupidity is authoritarian and leads to a bloated, innefficient system. This thinking just makes contracts meaningless, it just means you can claim ignorance everytime you sign into a contract you don’t like.
Regulating food is whole different game for a number of reasons, i dont think it’s a reasonable comparison.
No one has any right to complain, this possibility is clearly outlined in the t&c’s every person agreed to.
Shouldn’t have handed out your defining essence to a corporation.
Kinda wacked out take. Onus shouldnt be on the individual
Who should be responsible for these people agreeing to a contract and then not wanting to honour the contracts terms?
If personal responsibilty is “a whacked out take” then I’ll take that.
While I do agree its a bit whack, I question if everything needs 100% safety to be legal?
If someone offers a dangerous thing and you sign a waiver, maybe motocross, if you get injured is it the owners fault? Why should an individual be free from onus?
New Zealand understands this, you can sign away a companies liability to yourself. For adventure tourism stuff mostly. It’s a good and fair way to do things I think.
“The fuck else were these people expecting” is also my visceral reaction whenever shit like that happens, but if I think about for a bit longer, I realize that it’s not much different than saying “The fuck else were you expecting” to a rape victim who went alone into a dark alley. Sure, people are stupid for engaging with this obvious scam, but the bad guy is still the scammer, not the victims.
A rape victim didn’t sign a contract saying that would happen if they went dont that alley. That’s the difference.
There is no bad guy in this case, just an idiot and a company.
What about those of us who are related to the people who took the test, and never consented to the t&c? They have our data, too.
Blame the person you are related to. Duh.
Ok, either you let this slide, or I personnally strangle every living lawyers.
What?
What, "what? "
What did you not understand? I think I was very clear, use your words.
I don’t think it is reasonable to expect every individual to become a privacy / legal expert. I think people should have reasonable protections and assurances given to them without needing to study the details of everything they do on a case-by-case basis.
We have laws about what food can and cannot be sold - so that individuals don’t have to personally test and monitor every product for safety. Privacy & data could be done like that too.
I don’t agree with that at all, if you don’t or can’t understand the terms of a contract, you sign at your own peril, expecting the government to step in everytime a person decides to excercise their stupidity is authoritarian and leads to a bloated, innefficient system. This thinking just makes contracts meaningless, it just means you can claim ignorance everytime you sign into a contract you don’t like.
Regulating food is whole different game for a number of reasons, i dont think it’s a reasonable comparison.