From its start, Gmail conditioned us to trade privacy for free services
If Gmail proved anything, it was that people would, for the most part, accept any terms of service. Or at least not care enough to read the fine-print closely.
You're viewing a single thread.
In other news, water is wet. Honestly though, people expecting "free" services from big corpos are naive. What do they expect the servers and admins/devs are payed with?
Gmail was initially advertising funded while respecting privacy. It's a false dichotomy to argue that a service can't have a free privacy respecting offering. We've just become accustomed to accepting targeted advertising as the norm.
It’s a false dichotomy to argue that a service can’t have a free privacy respecting offering.
I don't believe anyone is arguing that it's technically impossible. But reality is pretty clear that it's implausible. Targeted ads reel in too much money.
I think the real fallacy is getting used to services being free at all. You need to pay a monthly fee for basically every utility, but as soon as it's in the digital world people expect that to change. What makes a search engine or mail provider so much different than your ISP or cable provider? You want competent services that respect your privacy? Pay for alternatives like Kagi and Proton.
It's not implausible, Proton has a free privacy respecting tier