Get it in an air-tight legal agreement with some kind of audit provision, actual enforcement and penalties, or don't give out data you care about.
Yes they can, because data privacy laws forbid collecting data for one purpose and then using it for new ones without notice or consent.
And of course the EU does nothing but fine tech companies bazillions of euros for GDPR violations.
Stop asking me about accepting cookies.
Stop asking me to subscribe to your email list
Stop asking me to review my last purchase.
Stop telling me I need to subscribe to view this content.
Stop asking for my phone number
Stop asking for my income
If I want to do or tell you any of these things I will initiate that myself.
Where I live, garbage disposal is a county contract. You get get whatever company your county has engaged. Do they think people would to move to another county for better garbage disposal?
Very occasionally these types of arrangements end up with an enthusiastically high performing company that does the right thing, but usually it's dumpster fires all the way down.
The purpose of the tool is to infer customer loyalty. What's the point of that in a captive market? I suppose whatever 3rd party is facilitating the survey gets paid and that's something.
Imagine a world where you don't need to click on anything because cookies are no longer being used for large scale tracking.
The banner is required every time there is processing of personal data where consent of required, whether that processing happened thanks to cookies or thanks to any other technical means (1px gifs, JavaScript fingerprinting, etc)
The banners are a fig leaf for behavior that violates the spirit of the GDPR, creating an aggravation where the simplest way to dismiss them is by agreeing.
Any site that doesn't offer a button to reject the tracking (with no more stops than angreeing) and still function as expected without the tracking, is in violation of the law.
Multiple times within a few minutes
During a damn incident I was trying to deal with
I left critical feedback. I wish someone would see it and feel ashamed, but it is rather clear that there haven't been decision makers in our industry capable of shame in many years.
I feel bad for you but... this is also kind of hilariously absurd/unaware of them.
If it's anyone other than your bank or brokerage, that seems pretty weird and sketchy.
Every other time they ask it's voluntary on your part, and you should decline. They just use the information for advertising at that point.
Which sucks.
It's to the point where, when we broke down in a live lane on a dual carriageway the other day (flat tyre - actually shredded a run flat, newer car so no spare, all lay-bys closed so nowhere to pull off road and couldn't make it to next exit), the police came out and cordoned off the lane and then the AA guy who came and rescued us asked if we could write him a review when the feedback request came through.
Of course, on this occasion I did write him an absolutely glowing review (which he very much deserved, and which I was more than happy to do), because this was an incredibly dangerous situation - potentially life or death. I also sent a thank you to the local police force that helped us out.
But that's the point: it was life or death. It really mattered. So of course I wanted to say thank you, and the feedback mechanism provided a decent way to do that.
But most of these feedback requests are for things that don't matter that much, if at all, and are no better than spam, because of course everybody asks for it for every little interaction nowadays... and it's just endlessly tiresome.
So, yes: please stop.
(Btw, as someone who worked in market research for 7 years I can tell you that CX reviews skew towards the extremes - either very positive or very negative - and that you're much more likely to get a review if someone has a bad experience than if they have a good one. As a result, whilst these reviews can be good for qualitatively highlighting specific problems that might need to be solved, deriving any kind of aggregate score from them and expecting that to be representative of the average customer's experience is a fool's errand. Please don't do it. [Aside: I know, I know - this will stop no-one but I'd feel remiss if I didn't point it out, especially on this site where a lot of you will - I hope - get the point and apply it in your own businesses.])
Vscodium, and Claude replacement. And its abliterated to boot, so no censorship and garbage.
Per recent comment from Anthropic at https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/8036#issuec...
What is going on over there at Anthropic?
It's kind of shocking how some people just don't get how insanely insulting it is for an application to constantly ask for feedback.
If it was just one app every now and then. But instead it's (nearly) everything you buy, every restaurant you go to, every app you use, every doctor you see, every hotel you stay at, etc.
It's like when a guy on the street asks you for money. Like you haven't already been asked by everyone else on the block, including the guy standing right next to him.
It should at least wait until I've finished my journey and parked up. Not that I'm going to bother giving ad hoc feedback then either.
redwood•1h ago
mreome•1h ago