• miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’ll see how it plays out. Have the lawmakers even thought about if and how services have to inform users between one another about their respective TOS?

    Like, I wouldn’t want to connect to another service before being presented with their terms and privacy policy. Only then should I be able to make a (now informed) decision on whether I want to do it or not.

    I guess it all boils down to why you use a certain service. I use Signal to avoid having my messages handled by a service that belongs to Meta. Texting with a WhatsApp user would defeat the whole point for me.

    • BerührtGras@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah but it’s not about you, it’s about making the messaging app choice in the daily life more balanced for the average user. The average user doesnt care about tos or privacy. You wont get the average user to switch to signal by saying “take care of your privacy”. The average user wants to send messages to their friends. Thats it. And because publicly traded companies have to grow they have to increase revenue from their services. So, monetize user data, which lawmakers could stop, increase revenue by charging a fee, which the average user doesnt want to, or show ads, no one wants to. And I guess free software has the benefit of working without the need to monetize their users. THIS is the selling point. And if you get it to work across different messaging apps, users will leave wa.