• plz1
      link
      English
      391 month ago

      “Privacy for me, not for thee” means I, as a non-billionaire, get my privacy back before I give one iota about some billionaire not being able to hide a mistress on his super yacht.

      • @werefreeatlast
        link
        English
        41 month ago

        Is it still a mistress if he can’t get it up so she has to slurp it as best she can?

        • plz1
          link
          English
          51 month ago

          Calling her a cleaning lady seems more degrading than the situation is, to me.

    • @RememberTheApollo_
      link
      English
      151 month ago

      And the billionaires like Zuckerberg that make a lot of money trying to track you everywhere you go on the internet or with your cellphone factor into that statement where?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -330 days ago

        You know they are not all the same person? Nevertheless even Zuckerberg has right to privacy, not to ours, but to his

        • @aesthelete
          link
          English
          6
          edit-2
          30 days ago

          When anyone else has an actual right to privacy I’ll give a shit about Zuckerberg’s – who btw has done more to destroy privacy rights than perhaps any other human being in history – “right to privacy”.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -129 days ago

            I know who he his 🙄 It doen’t change the fact that equalling all rich people to bad people is counterproductive. And human rights apply to all humans, except if what you mean by the lack of privacy ls that he should go to prision, to which I agree

            • @aesthelete
              link
              English
              129 days ago

              Except the right to privacy isn’t an enshrined human right at all and this particular asshole would lobby government to make sure that any effort to make it one would fall flat.