— New Privacy Statements Digested —

09/24/2016

New privacy statements that if you agree to, you’re giving them permission to change at their whims.

How many changes that we’re subject too.

I got a privacy statement from Netflix tonight, and I had to agree to it to go on watching Netflix. It was 45 pages long, and it was all doublespeak, that lawyers understand and author.

I might have signed my life away. It’s the devil’s tool, all the contracts that we agree to. To view or use a service, you are intimidated to agree, or no service. The honesty of devils is a misnomer in my book.

I choose to agree to use your service, cause you don’t allow it, if I don’t.

So who is being fair and just?

It could be compared to an autocratic system. Where the autocrats hold power over others, sometimes dictatorial and sometimes cruelly. It to me, is a fascist dictatorship conditioning away our individual freedoms, so that we’re subservient to the almighty buck.

I agree to pacify your insecurities.

You will not rule in the way you choose to rule. I’m the king of my soulful domain, and your insecurities are nothing, but a bag of feathers that I cast to the wind. Thus my agreements are nothing, but the breath of fresh air that make you soar into the wind of my blowing.

Any judgment you send my way will be met with the same rhetoric, and see if you can understand it.

Understandable Privacy Agreements, should be TWITTER Postable

Shorten the privacy agreements to be postable to Twitter, so I and everyone else will understand. Short and sweet, and what I pay for the service will suffice all the rest.

If you agree with these terms of service, then you can agree… But I don’t care.

Like I don’t care about your privacy agreements, conditioning us for the fear in the future.

I watched Person of Interest tonight, and the facial recognition software where the image is tagged with the conclusive judgments that they want to tag them to.

I saw a policeman tagged as an “obstructive agent”, and he was soon dead by the machine named Samaritan, that came into the show a few season’s past the 1st season.

It was a dictatorial AI that saw law and order, as whatever it deemed. When it was truly arbitrariness gone wild.

I think we should make the services agree to our agreements… or be boycotted. It behooves me to say that. Our best interests will be served, rather than the corporation’s best interests.

I agree to disagree… and make it legally binding for all who read. I just don’t care to read your doubletalk, and agree to something I don’t understand.

So, first of all, You want it Darker? You can find it here…