[judge2020]

The poster you're replying to did not say that AMZN/GOOG/AAPL wouldn't spy on you, they simply stated that evidence should be considered to justify claims, especially if you're trying to spread those claims to other people. Your argument "we should sound alarms without evidence because tomorrow we'll have evidence" is classic conspiracy theory reasoning, which is why people will classify you as one. In essence, we shouldn't throw people in jail for crimes they haven't committed yet.

[whynaut]

The leap you make to punish someone is much further than the one you take to protect yourself, i.e. locking your own device away for a moment.

[fartcannon]

I believe the post in question believes they have enough evidence to justify the actions and is speaking from a position of surprise/resignation at the state of things.

Kind if like, 'I cant believe it's come to this, but given all the evidence, it's justified."

[titzer]

That's a pretty big leap. The OP was talking about putting their phone in a drawer, not throwing people in jail without a trial. I, for one, don't blame them one bit.

[johannes1234321]

The issue is: We can't prove it either way. We can make law which increases the risk if they are uncovered and hope they abide to it (see GDPR and California Law for attempts in that direction) but a prove is hard.

At the same time we see the incentives, and the incentives are to collect and analyze things.