[sudioStudio64]

You are completely free to not use it. I'm not trying to be a smart-a here. There have never been more options for end users.

You aren't signing away your rights to privacy without due process...that's your part to evaluate. "Is this useful enough to me that it's worth agreeing to this?"

Also, this is version dependent. The TOS for an individual consumer is different than a developer with an MSDN license, and a business with a volume agreement. Do you have different privacy requirements? Are you willing to pay for them? If they can't make money with the product that they built in the manner that they came up with then it isn't illegal, or really even remotely morally odious, for them to ask for a different payment arrangement.

Now. Do I like everything about life in a capitalist national security state? No way. But do I whine when some vendor doesn't do exactly what I want when I'm really not event scratching the surface of enough money to get their attention? Seriously, man.

[the8472]

you're going off tangents here.

Obviously the premise of this discussion is that you install their software.

IF you install windows 10 THEN you agree to their terms of service which includes granting them access to your private files.

[sudioStudio64]

I'm going off on a tangent?

YOU installed their software. You didn't have to. No one forced you to. Don't like the TOS? Call them and schedule a meeting to talk about coming up with a different arrangement...they will want money for that, but you can certainly have it.

The truth is that there is jack all that I or anyone else can say to you that would change your mind about any of this.

Also, I'm not willing to grant that you are reading the TOS correctly...so there's that point. No offense, but its pretty dense and things that are probably pretty reasonable come across as a privacy invasion to people that are really sensitive on the subject.

[the8472]

> YOU installed their software.

I did? I never said so. I'm just looking at their Privacy Statement and find questionable clauses there.

> Also, I'm not willing to grant that you are reading the TOS correctly

I did say that's a possibility from the start. But as long as nobody shows that it's not possible that my reading is not how a lawyer or judge would read it I remain deeply skeptical about it.