Jonkman Microblog
  • Login
Show Navigation
  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. Sean R. Lynch ☑️ (seanl@social.literati.org)'s status on Thursday, 12-Apr-2018 12:43:56 EDT Sean R. Lynch ☑️ Sean R. Lynch ☑️

    Two questions have occurred to me in the context of Zuck's testimony:

    1. What does it mean for someone to "agree" to something when it's well known that almost nobody actually reads the type of agreement they've "agreed" to?

    2. What does "consent" mean between two parties of vastly different power?

    In conversation Thursday, 12-Apr-2018 12:43:56 EDT from social.literati.org permalink
    1. Adam (inkslinger@mastodon.club)'s status on Thursday, 12-Apr-2018 12:51:49 EDT Adam Adam
      in reply to

      @seanl Related to your first point, and the second, actually: can people be meaningfully said to have agreed to a contract with 1,000+ words of often deliberately obtuse language, especially given the power imbalance between the user and the corporation?

      Also, given that people are "allowed" to have accounts on most social platforms before they're the age of majority, are they even legally bound? Can a 14yo enter a legally binding contract?

      In conversation Thursday, 12-Apr-2018 12:51:49 EDT from mastodon.club permalink
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

Jonkman Microblog is a social network, courtesy of SOBAC Microcomputer Services. It runs on GNU social, version 1.2.0-beta5, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All Jonkman Microblog content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.

Switch to desktop site layout.