Originally Posted by poprhetor
If you aren't willing to sacrifice a little "privacy" for what Internet technology offers you, then maybe it's not the thing for you.
I have no idea how old you are, but that was really spoken like a youngster who has lived his whole life "connected" and never understood the real concepts behind privacy. What's next, you're going to toss out the Bill of Rights because some things are easier without them?
Look, I've been using the internet for almost 20 years now, starting in the late 80s to be exact. Some of you were there with me, but most of you didn't even know what an "internet" was until it was all prettied up with the WWW for you. I've been dealing with the privacy vs. functionality issue as a matter of daily course for years and years as part of my job.
So it really gets my goat when someone comes along with ridiculous generalizations like this. You're trying to break this down into a black-and-white argument; and although I think we actually can do that here, you're drawing the line in the wrong place. "This internet thing is not for you..." Give me a break! The internet is for everyone, it's difficult to imagine life without it. (It's not difficult to imagine a www without ads sucking away your bandwidth...man, those were the days.)
If you wanted to try and draw a crappy line, at least draw it at "online gaming may not be for you". But even that is misguided, because that's not the issue. The issue is the undisclosed transmission, storage, and use of your physical location and other activies not directly related to the product you purchased. If they had simply disclosed it up front, outside the box, then those of us so pissed about this would not have a leg to stand on, because then we would have had the option not to buy a product that we felt infringed upon our privacy. As it is, EA was deceptive at best.