[lrvick]

This comes across as victim blaming.

Users are given the choice to accept risks that are buried on page 7 of privacy policies only a lawyer could understand the tricks in.

Services knowingly endangering unknowing users for money should be like cigarettes and be forced to say on the signup page in big bold text they can and will sell user data to anyone, including law enforcement.

Users largely think free services are like public libraries and do not default to expecting they are being exploited for money. Element, Wikipedia, and duckduckgo exist for free without selling user data so it is not a given that exploitation is always present in free services.