[HN Gopher] Do not accept terms and conditions
___________________________________________________________________
Do not accept terms and conditions
Author : halflife
Score : 60 points
Date : 2025-10-17 19:32 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.termsandconditions.game)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.termsandconditions.game)
| zahlman wrote:
| > You need to enable JavaScript to play.
|
| I didn't enable JavaScript. Does that mean I win?
| brudgers wrote:
| Yes. You won the whole internet.
| technothrasher wrote:
| WOPR would be proud.
| frenchmajesty wrote:
| I get a Heroku error trying to view the site.
| gowld wrote:
| According to its terms and conditions, Heroku is not Web Scale.
| SCUSKU wrote:
| Have they tried MongoDB?
| johnsillings wrote:
| same
| eric-p7 wrote:
| That means you won the game.
| purplelemons wrote:
| damn, I just lost The Game.
| RhysU wrote:
| The Sequel: Decline e-Delivery.
| ratelimitsteve wrote:
| T&C 3: Block Notifications
| DeepYogurt wrote:
| Damn. I lost it.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Yep, I just lost the game as well.
| ratelimitsteve wrote:
| HN hug of death?
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Their heroku setup is having a moment. But if this is about the
| game I've been playing with my rude ass car that started nagging
| me about Kia's t&c update, weeks after i first got it, every time
| i start the engine...
|
| I'm not sure if I'm winning and I'm not sure if the game is fun
| anymore. at least the car and I have been playing a single game
| of me declining the t&c and please ask me again later for some
| three years and a few months now. So the replay value is high.
|
| Also sometimes my wife pretends to go for the "accept" button and
| it makes me all hot and bothered
| fainpul wrote:
| This game seems to be all the rage right now. I've seen clones
| of it everywhere.
| Etheryte wrote:
| If you're in Europe, then most new cars do that right now.
| There was an EU-wide court case some time ago whether tracking
| consent can be one-and-done in a car or not because different
| people can be driving a car at different times, if memory
| serves well. Rather than simply drop the tracking, the car
| manufacturers decided to just nag you every time. This is now
| the first thing on my list when looking for a new car, if they
| do stuff like that I'm not buying.
| twelvedogs wrote:
| I backed into my garage wall after being distracted by one of
| those things, now I just leave it up
| agile-gift0262 wrote:
| My Toyota also got that game in a DLC about a year after I
| bought it
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Mozilla did an expose a while back on what's hidden in those
| terms, IIRC. Things like "we want to know do you use the
| heated seats" (okay... useful free market research maybe) but
| also "we store personality profiles including your sexual
| preferences"
|
| Somewhere I hope a PM is deliberating the intricacies of
| automotive teledildonics. I hope.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| Broken for me, but going off of the headline, I have been playing
| the same game with Apple Health. Refuse to accept what probably
| gives them some wiggle room to monetize my health information.
| Which also means that I cannot setup a wake up alarm, only
| generic alarms.
| arkadiyt wrote:
| Apple Health data is end-to-end encrypted, even without using
| ADP. They don't have access to it:
| https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| That is cute, but if big tech goes out of its way to get
| specific permissions to do something, I am going to assume it
| is not in my best interests.
|
| Sure, Apple is less bad than many others, but that does not
| mean they are trustworthy.
| midtake wrote:
| I assumed it was to update your sleep stats in health.
| geminiboy wrote:
| Shameless Plug
|
| I created this web application to review the terms and conditions
| of website and show an LLM surface the ugly parts of the TOS.
|
| tosreview.org/
|
| Shoutout: this was inspired by the amazing humans at tosdr.org
| coffeecoders wrote:
| Your site gives me ssl error.
| chathaway123 wrote:
| Just wanted to say thank you. It prompted a review of our own
| T&Cs.
| topkai22 wrote:
| For mandatory T&Cs I'll put in the signature box "Decline",
| including updating the HTML page to say "decline" instead of "OK"
| and screenshotting it or modifying the HTTP response sent back to
| include riders.
|
| I know it probably won't matter, but it's kind of fun for me.
| odie5533 wrote:
| No chance that would hold up in court. Clickwraps have been
| tested in courts and are fully enforceable.
| wat10000 wrote:
| And keep in mind that (at least in the US) the opposite of "I
| accept the terms and conditions" is not "I get to do whatever
| I want," it's "I am accessing this service without
| authorization, which is a crime under the Computer Fraud and
| Abuse Act."
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| If I'm on the jury, I'll make sure he walks.
|
| The only valid agreements require the party seeking the
| agreement to make efforts in that pursuit. Did a human view
| the signed agreement afterward? Do they store that signed
| agreement in such a way as to be able to retrieve it if
| they need to contest the terms later?
|
| Then no agreement was made.
|
| And as for the CFAA provisions, if they put those resources
| on the public internet, then the public has the right to
| interact with them. You can't fence off the sidewalk and
| claim that someone trespasses when they walk on it.
| pbasista wrote:
| > You can't fence off the sidewalk and claim that someone
| trespasses when they walk on it.
|
| Perhaps a better analogy would be:
|
| If you go out into a public space, you have to accept
| that by doing so you lose a certain portion of your
| privacy. You cannot expect that other people will agree
| to your "terms and conditions" before being allowed to
| talk to you. They will just talk to you if they so like.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| > _If I 'm on the jury, I'll make sure he walks._
|
| If you're going to be on a jury, don't post things like
| this on the internet, even if I agree with you.
| wat10000 wrote:
| It's not like fencing off part of the sidewalk. It's like
| having a building next to that sidewalk with a door. The
| fact that the door is easily accessible doesn't mean
| everyone is welcome to come in. If the door is open
| that's generally how it is. If it's locked, even badly,
| entering would be trespassing. If it's locked with a
| button that unlocks it, and the button says "by pushing
| this button you agree to the following terms," well,
| that's hard to say.
| pbasista wrote:
| Are you implying that if a US "service" consists of e.g.
| publicly accessible HTTP endpoints, it is illegal to use
| these endpoints in the US without "accepting" some terms
| and conditions that the provider of these endpoints
| requires its users to accept before using them?
|
| I do not understand how such a requirement would be legally
| enforceable for _public_ endpoints.
| ralph84 wrote:
| Yes of course. Ask weev how the "it was publicly
| accessible" defense worked out.
| delichon wrote:
| Simply violating a TOS is not a federal crime, as long as
| it doesn't circumvent a technical barrier like a
| subscription wall. This is a new SCOTUS interpretation of
| the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act as of 2021, in Van Buren
| v. United States.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| How much money, time and freedom to waste do you have to
| fight and then appeal this from jail then prison?
| wat10000 wrote:
| You can reasonably assume that if no terms and conditions
| were offered, then your use of a publicly accessible
| endpoint is authorized.
|
| But if terms and conditions ARE offered to you, and you
| bypass acceptance somehow, then you're knowingly
| accessing the system without being authorized.
|
| I really doubt this would be prosecuted except as part of
| some much larger misbehavior, but it is there.
| moritzwarhier wrote:
| I envy the rigor and time investment, but I'm inclined to
| agree: there are unenforceable contracts, but I'm not aware
| of any case in which denying t&c's while using a service
| deliberately was successfully defended as compatible?
|
| I'm not a lawyer though, I'm not even that well-informed
| about everyday law stuff for laymen.
| fsckboy wrote:
| > _No chance that would hold up in court. Clickwraps have
| been tested in courts and are fully enforceable._
|
| there may be no chance it would hold up in court, but not for
| the reason you say. it would have be be because "any words on
| on a modified document "signature" line would be taken as a
| signature" or "subverting a clickwrap license is theft of
| services" or whatever.
|
| that "agreed" clickwrap licenses have been found enforceable
| is a separate fact about a separate issue.
| paulddraper wrote:
| > An error occurred in the application and your page could not be
| served. If you are the application owner, check your logs for
| details. You can do this from the Heroku CLI with the command
| heroku logs --tail
| lazycouchpotato wrote:
| Site's borked, but for those that were able to access it, is it
| like Ente's https://consent.gg/ ?
| fph wrote:
| Note to everyone: disable your adblocker when visiting that
| website, or you'll see only an empty page with a countdown.
| dylan604 wrote:
| what happens at the end of the countdown?
| vintermann wrote:
| The app is erroring out for me, but I have a suspicion it's a
| "Neal-like"?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-21 23:01 UTC)