| ▲ | rdtsc 3 hours ago |
| > The company plans to grab four categories: your sleep, your medications, your medical records, and your cycle tracking details So you buy a device but you can't effectively use half of its features because you'd also have to agree to send them your medical records? Ok then if I refuse, will they refund 50% of the device price since now it's not usable any more? |
|
| ▲ | benjiro29 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| If your in EU, you contact the local EU consumer group where you buy the device. https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/who-we-are/about-us/e... And file a complaint... As that breaches a dozen or more EU laws. If a lot of people do it in all the countries, it becomes a national issue. That is the only way you fix things, and yes, we have had multiple successes with companies taking the piss. Even Samsung can not escape as their have officies in the EU and sell products there. For the folks outside the EU, ... Its a harder fight and you need to look up your local agencies. |
|
| ▲ | andy99 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I had a ~2008 vintage Samsung phone with a fingerprint sensor that gave your blood oxygen level (SpO2). One day it told me something similar, I had to agree to send them data or I couldn’t use it. So I never used it again, but yeah they have been abusing their costumers a long time. This is they same company whose tvs take pictures of what you are watching and send them back to Samsung. |
| |
| ▲ | wolvoleo 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Every TV does that unfortunately. It's called automatic content recognition but every manufacturer has a different euphemism for it. It's definitely not just Samsung. As bad as this is. The problem is bigger than just them. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | skeledrew an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Buying a device doesn't mean vendor-hosted services are included, unless explicitly stated. This is the kind of thing why they can get away with taking unsolicited actions on people's devices whenever they want. CUT THAT CORD! |
|
| ▲ | sam1r 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > I really feel like "grab" is quite condescending By all means, let's use a more appropriate term, like "abuse" or "misappropriate". It's not sufficiently condescending for a company that's trying to train AI on people's private health data. | | |
| ▲ | mcmcmc 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Do you think those services are “free”? If you want cloud storage and syncing, it comes at a price. If you’re not paying with money, you’re paying with your privacy and freedom. | | |
| ▲ | aftbit 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I sorta assumed they were making money from selling you the device. | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | We are not required to permit every possible business model to exist. Companies are desperately trying to get their hands on every piece of data they can get to train AI, hence the abominable use of "opt out", which is already horrible even without the added bait-and-switch coercion of "or we'll make the device you already purchased worse". "pay or consent" stunts have already been ruled illegal under the GDPR. This goes even further than that, where you don't even have the option to pay. |
|
| |
| ▲ | BigTTYGothGF 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > condescending How can you be "condescending" to a company? | | | |
| ▲ | Barbing 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Samsung can mitigate the harm and frustration by providing users options. Would you prefer this pathway of their way or the highway? | |
| ▲ | ben_w 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I really feel like "grab" is quite condescending to a company (Samsung) that provides services at scale (upon/after consent) to help you.. "be better" (simplified..), with direct customization and tailoring. The headline as described sounds to me like they're violating GDPR by tying to force "consent" for a not-strictly-necessary-for-functionality use of health data. The European Data Protection Board has repeatedly stated that consent is (generally) not considered to be "freely given" if there is a significant detriment for refusing it or if the user has no genuine choice. Note however that caveat: as described. There may be some more details which make this not unlawful. Also, actually deleting your data if you don't consent is the kind of thing GDPR requires. | |
| ▲ | customguy 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "snatch with their spider leg like fingers that are dripping with digestive fluid" |
|
