zlacker

>>winsto+(OP)
This is awful. And announcing this late on a Friday is what news organizations call “taking out the trash,” publicizing something when people aren’t paying attention.

>>haram_+g3
Really sorry that you think this is awful. Certainly do opt-out. I think that taking on LinkedIn and creating a better engineering resume is a good thing to do. I can assure you that the Friday announcement is a result of our team grinding to hit a planned release week, not anything other than that (I would have loved to get this out earlier in the week)

>>ammon+Q4
Does it matter what you think here though? Your customers gave you their data under one pretense, why do you think you can ethically change that pretense without discussing it with your customers? Said another way, you entered into a business deal with your customers and unilaterally changed the terms. I feel like if someone did that to you, you would be upset as well.

People in this thread have carefully laid out the dark patterns you are using to trick your customers into allowing you to try and make more money. This is wildly unethical, and coming to defend it on here shows us clearly that you have not thought about this from any perspective but your own.

Good luck with your company, you’re going to need it.

>>wbroni+CO
"you entered into a business deal with your customers and unilaterally changed the terms"

This just jumped out at me. Doesn't every agreement/TOS document these days say they can unilaterally change the terms at any time and your only recourse is to stop using the service?

I mean, I guess my point is not that it's ok, but that it emphasizes how "agreements" in our society don't seem to be actual agreements and we go around with the certainty that most will never be enforced, but then people don't always agree.