Flip phones are available. SBF has been issued with one under his latest conditions of release.
Remember though, privacy comes at a cost. Thousands of parasitic "startups" that live off of VC, produce nothing for sale, have no profits and rely on surveillance to demonstrate speculative "value" might suffer or even "go out of business", "Big Tech" might not rake in billions per quarter for selling ad services, "tech jobs" might be lost. It could be catastrophic. The entire economy could crash. It could put an AI-driven utopian future at risk. All because of the desire to maintain privacy. This is not just another HN comment conatining only FUD or hype-based predictions with zero factual support. "We take privacy seriously." It's threat to what we do. As an "industry" it's vital that we maintain peoples' trust while we surveil them. /s
"Business" is normally defined generally as sales and purchases made for profit.
What if a company has no profits.
What if a company's product or service is "free". Is that sales.
What if a company has sales, i.e., online advertising services, but in its communications with employees and the public it continually suggests its "business" is something else. Why would it do that.
In any event, there is a question IMO of whether a "tech" company is even "in business" if it can only ever pay its employees and other expenses with investment rounds. Is it possible to "go out of business" if the company was never "in business" (assuming we accept the usual definition of a business).
We already know how VC and "tech" companies would answer these questions. Anyone who questions what they are doing is always wrong. We know that. We have heard it before. But VC and "tech" companies do not have a history of being honest. There is a credibility issue. Not to mention that trying to discredit people who ask questions is silly.
This thread titled "What happens when your phone is spying on you" is about (free) "smartphone apps" that collect data about people below peoples' awareness, strategically avoiding the issue of consent. Why is this even happening. Did VC and "tech" companies have anything to do with it. No, of course not. Performing such hidden data collection is exactly what they consider a "business". It seems that some folks would prefer not to be spied on even when it is essential to someone else's "business".
I probably failed because the quoted words were not actually quotes. I could understand a word like “value” being quoted sarcastically without a specific quote in mind, but the quoting of many other words and phrases were mystifying.
Try to replace OPs quotes with an appositive like so-called or so to say. "Big tech" = so-called Big Tech, "industry" = so-called industry etc. This way, the irony does make sense, especially when you read OPs earlier comments.
This seems like a sarcastic reference to "startup-speak": phrases that are somewhat overused by people from the startup industry. Corporate slang and a sign of belonging of sorts that might feel a little overblown for those outside the tech world.
I'm just a hobbyist geek, though, so I may heavily overinterpret things (and the OP) here. :)
Remember though, privacy comes at a cost. Thousands of parasitic "startups" that live off of VC, produce nothing for sale, have no profits and rely on surveillance to demonstrate speculative "value" might suffer or even "go out of business", "Big Tech" might not rake in billions per quarter for selling ad services, "tech jobs" might be lost. It could be catastrophic. The entire economy could crash. It could put an AI-driven utopian future at risk. All because of the desire to maintain privacy. This is not just another HN comment conatining only FUD or hype-based predictions with zero factual support. "We take privacy seriously." It's threat to what we do. As an "industry" it's vital that we maintain peoples' trust while we surveil them. /s