Yes, blame the users.

Oh they aren't a frontier on this. Undoing user configuration is well tested in Windows land.

Linkedin, Amazon and others have gotten around this by adding a "new" feature, default on. I've gone into privacy settings where everything is unchecked, except a newly added checkbox.

This is apparently enough to hold up the broadly-accepted fiction that its possible to use these services while maintaining privacy and without risk. There's a huge industry of hosting services to handle the needs companies who compete with the primary cloud providers, who can't afford the IP and competitive risk.

OpenAI was caught directly stealing from apple, asking employees to bring in their laptops. Its a polite fiction that companies aren't trying to gain any advantage over the other. There's no effective consequence, and even if they get caught red handed they can litigate for decades.

You know what they'll say in their defense. "This is an extremely complicated systems, and we apologize that a technical solution was broken in an intricate way. [Insert boilerplate about taking privacy seriously here]"

These companies need to burn.

Pirating copyrighted works is absolutely illegal in most jurisdictions, but pirating every single copyrighted work in the world is somehow exempt from law.

We can't apply plebeian laws or ethics to our benevolent overlords, they are above our worldly worries.

> Ignoring the checkbox is an utterly offensive move, but repeatedly manipulating it contrary to stated consumer intent is a whole other level.

I'm not sure why the second one is worse than the first one.