zlacker

>>linker+(OP)
About 10 days ago I was climbing upstairs late headed to bed. I stared at the Hue app on my phone confused. Was Hue really asking me to agree to a new terms of service (ToS) before it would allow me to turn off lights in my own home? Lights that I had purchased outright without Phillips financing more than 8 years ago? Indeed it was. What value as a customer do I get from these hilariously timed, intrusive ToS updates? Better question: what value does the company issuing them gain by alienating existing customers?

>>waffle+Jl2
It’s not about the value you get, it’s about the value they get. How is this even legal is beyond me.

>>gumbal+tn2
> How is this even legal is beyond me.

It's the same argument as people who say Google should be allowed to censor whoever they want. "They're a private company, they can do whatever they want. Nobody is forcing you to use their services."

Clearly, in many areas of life, politics and the legal system needs to be realigned with the modern technological landscape. But so far, it seems most such efforts are pushing things in the exact wrong direction.

>>ta8645+dp2
It's not comparable because you paid for bulbs, swithches, bridges etc. You don't pay for Google, at least not in the example you gave.

>>regula+ov4
It's the same argument. Nobody forced you to pay for the bulbs, switches, bridges etc.

For the record, I don't agree with it -- just saying.