Ridiculous. How can someone write "we value your privacy" and then share data with 807 partners. If I share anything with 8 people I pretty much consider it public information already, unless I have a very good reason to trust them. Sharing something with 807 companies is probably less private than taking all that data, putting it up on a billboard, and placing that billboard next to the busiest place in town.
I'm legitimately interested in getting the bank account & sort code details of Elon, Bezos, Arnault, Zuckerberg, Gates, Ballmer, Buffet, Ellison, Page, and Brin.
That ist something I ask myself, too. It's so irritating, having to decline all these greasy fingered little fuckers one-by-one. That is just a way for me, nowadays, to delete the app completely.
"Legitimate interest" refers to that which lawmakers have considered to be the "legitimate interest" of private companies, that is, making money selling your data. "Illegitimate interest" would probably be using your private information to blackmail you.
I think this is so they can have it auto toggled on per some EU regulations, forcing you to go through and untoggle every single one with "legitimate interest".
I was also curious about this and just had a chat with gpt 3.5 about it, and it gave an example of "a bank collecting data to detect and prevent fraud" as a valid legitimate interest and "a company collecting data to sell to advertisers" as an invalid legitimate interest.
It also said that legitimate interests must be explained, as on what interests they are, why they are considered legitimate, how the processing of that data accomplishes that interest and any potential impact it has on the user's privacy and freedom.
Based on this, I think "legitimate interest" is being used as a reason instead of a category that covers genetic legitimate reasons that should still be explained, not hand waved as "legitimate interest".
Though I believe this only applies in the context of the GPDR (because the bot specifically mentioned it), and might vary in other jurisdictions.
Imagine an auditorium filled to capacity with people standing at the back and crouching in the rows. At the front of the auditorium a Microsoft spokesman is saying "Ok partners, here's the confidential data. Make sure nobody shares it beyond this room. Ok, so David wrote a letter to his mother Nancy on March 2nd, which included the keywords 'prostate', 'cancer' and 'diagnosis'. If you'd like to use those words to show David some ads, go right ahead -- but make sure nobody beyond this room knows this confidential information. Next up is Martha..."
It's not that they now changed something with data collection and sharing within the update. They always did it, all services free of charge do it and most that cost money likely take the extra money as well.
It's now that they tell you in a short and informative way (1st sentence) and ask for your consent.
What's really infuriating, are websites and services that have an "Accept All" button but no "Reject All". Instead you have to manage individually and sometimes I have to flip 30 separate buttons to disable data sharing, where they even call advertisers a 'necessary 3rd party' requiring interaction on top.
I always flip the 30 buttons and then accidentally click Accept All because it’s in the place that I would expect the Confirm My Choices button to be and I am tired of looking at all the buttons and don’t read the most important one. I always tell myself I’ll slow down next time, but I’m just trying to get to the stupid website to read whatever stupid link I clicked on so I’m impatient every time.
I did one once where it was like 400 toggles. Took me 10 minutes. I did it just to see how ridiculous it was. I don't remember what site it was but I definitely never went back.
They were thinking that those caps were among the top items found littering beaches. So they put forward this measure to attempt to curb that issue.
Nobody should be buying single use bottles anyway if there are alternatives available. Maybe that's the quiet part - making them less attractive to consumers
Drinking from a can only works from one side, so I guess think of it that way.
I wonder how many people haven’t realised that the new Mail/Outlook client, the one they’re pushing everyone towards in Windows, actually syncs all your mail to MS servers.
Yeah, Microsoft is trying to normalise the idea that your own personal email client should be open to them to access and steal your data so they can advertise at you.
Fuck windows and fuck outlook.
Thunderbird is free and entirely private on all platforms (And K9 mail on Android is also maintained by the Thunderbird team)
Also, I seem to recall my dad migrating to a new machine borking his email because of something like that. ( I didn't catch the details. he was grumbly and growly in ways only a unix admin could be.)
"Partners" are people you could invite to site around a conference table with you. For it to be a partnership, you need to be able to have a meaningful discussion among all the different partners. 800ish is even too big for an auditorium where you're presenting to all your "partners". 800ish is a small arena.
I get what you’re saying, but that’s what it’s called in business. They are usually called “affiliates” more formally, and they provide ancillary income to a business. The whole thing is a partnership - I give you traffic and you give me some money if they convert.
Source: am in marketing and that’s just how it works.
If you said to someone "can you keep a secret" and they said "I value your privacy, I'll only share your secret with 807 others", I doubt you'd be telling them many secrets.
Might as well just get your secret printed on a billboard and hang it up in town.
That would actually be a preference. If it's a free product making money off of user data and advertising, having the choice to pay would be better for privacy concerns. If the app is worth it if course.
It's been normalised for years, maybe decade. The only difference is that now they have to bother with telling you and asking for permission (which some still ignore completely).
Also, since we're talking Outlook, some mail client send your credentials to their servers to improve your user experience by fetching mails on their end, meaning that not only data from your device are sent to whoever paid for them, but your actual mails are free for them to access without you ever knowing. The new outlook on desktop does that, but outlook is not the only one to do this.
If i see this kind of shit, 90% of the time their domain would just go into my browsers' blocklist. It's likely either riddled with ads, or hosts incorrect/incompletely information too
For your old emails, use a more private app. iOS Mail is good enough although if you need push for Gmail support, Email by Edison is good as it gives you a single button to press to opt out of Edison Trends.
Their privacy label, in the App Store, is one of the better ones among email clients.
I’m using Proton Mail as my main email. They have an option for forwarding emails from Gmail/Outlook to Proton. I just haven’t done it yet because I almost never use Outlook
Fair enough, they sell access to your eyeballs to their real customers, the advertisers.
But, what isn't fair is that it's 807 "partners". This isn't 807 different brands who might want to advertise to you, it's far more than that. This is 807 different "partners" among whom are Google, Meta, ByteDance, Amazon, Alibaba, etc. who then each go on to sell access to their hundreds of thousands of advertisers.
You can't expect to have a meaningful privacy policy when you're sharing that data with 807 different entities.
The way I see it, they have us over a barrel. Unless there’s law on the books that says you can’t do that, your recourse is to pay for email or setup your own mail server. Good luck getting others to trust that though. I guess you could pay for a 3rd party cert.