"Unless you turn it off, Google uses your Gmail to train an AI to finish other people's sentences. It does that by analyzing how you respond to its suggestions. And when you opt in to using a new Gmail function called Help Me Write, Google uses what you type into it to improve its AI writing, too. You can't say no."

The mass media and blogs love to present Big Tech's tactics as a fait accompli. Instead they should be making the point that "defaults" are used to deceptively "gain consent". We need legislation to stop this practice.

The paragraph begins "Unless you turn it off,...", then it states "And when you opt in ..." and then it ends with "You can't say no."

Well, which is it. Can they say no by turning it off or not opting in. Or is it impossible to say no.

Of course they can say no. And when they do, it complicates matters for Google. If saying no were useless, then privacy-eroding "defaults" and so-called "dark patterns" would not exist. Why bother tricking people into saying yes or not saying no, if saying no was meaningless and consent is an afterthought. Before you cynically conclude, "there's nothing anyone can do" (watch the replies), ask yourself why dark patterns exist and why Google pays billions to multiple companies to be the "default search engine". Big Tech and smaller so-called "tech" companies put a lot of effort into these tactics. Why. Because they are bored and enjoy manipulating people? No. (Well, maybe. But that's another topic.) It's because people can say no, and when they do, it can have potential repercussions.

Anyway, no problem with the rest of the article. Although it's more about what the companies are doing versus what computer users could be doing, namely, objecting.