Hacker News Reader

Comment by robertlagrant | Hacker News Reader

> This is a kind of stoic virtue signal that may make people feel more mature for agreeing, but fails to fix issues while mocking people who try to make a difference.

None of these comments are fixing issues or trying to make a difference. Sending the product back is a really good idea, especially if this change in terms means you can get a refund even if you've had it a long time.

View on HN

The reason I replied to the parent comment was because of their dismissive tone. Of course returning the product is a good idea, but telling reasonable people to "chill out", and dismissing their concerns by suggesting they "just XYZ" is truly unproductive. It ends the conversation rather than engaging with it.

Still not an argument against people being allowed to be mad regarding this. You just can't give a fuck about data privacy and expect people to not oppose this and speak up.

> being allowed to be mad

No one can stop you being mad. No one's saying it's not allowed. It's possible someone is still young enough to misinterpret adult interactions as parental fiat, but it's not the case.

"We should have a framework that prohibits companies from selling a product with a certain agreement, then changing the agreement unilaterally"

That isn't trying to make a difference? Excuse me? Read that back.

The framework already exists, it says to return the product and ask for a refund.

You can claim detrimental reliance though, but it's a stretch and bad faith imo. Try your luck with a judge and attorney fees

The framework that exists is crap and should be replaced with something where you as a consumer should not have to watch the eula changes like a hawk, and then the onus should not be on you as a consumer to do extra work to get refunded for a bait and switch.

The legal system is crap and should be replaced? I'm out of this discussion, go do a revolution or keep me out of it.

It's unfortunate that you see "incremental improvement" to be completely and uniquely equal to "revolution". The legal framework can be updated.

Not allowing giant corporates to do bait and switches with impunity is not a revolution.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com