Ruminations on policies and the terms and conditions

Aweh dearly beloved fellow Ruminants & Groupies in day 612 of Re-Modified Lock Down Level 1 and with alcohol.

Period as a semi-retired pensioner: 233 days

In the afternoon of Wednesday 17 November Nerine, my wife had an appointment at the dentist in Johannesburg. I was playing online chess when the phone started ringing incessantly. I ignored it and finished my game. Perhaps I shouldn’t have. I’m not diligent about answering the phone. When I finished my game, I saw Nerine had phoned me many times. I called back. Armed robbers had made an appointment at the dentist and held up everyone at the practice taking cash, jewellery, and cell phones. Nerine lost her iPhone and a small amount of cash. No one was hurt.

On Thursday morning we were at the Istore getting her a new phone. Smartphones are now such an essential part of our lives that immediate replacement is essential, particularly if you are running a business. Nerine’s iCloud backup had been corrupted and so Connor my youngest son (IT manager of our household) and I had a very tough time trying to restore her new phone. After many frustrating hours, we were only partially successful. Connor and I “agreed” to the Apple terms and conditions many, many times. We did not read them, nor did we agree to them. They are not optional, and you cannot negotiate them. “Agree” to them or piss-off.

Eddie Izzard, one of my favourite comedians, has said it far better than I could. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1ug9-rhSs4. Well worth it! Go to one minute and 30 seconds if you wish to skip the bit about Wikipedia. “Apple has made us liars and we cannot tell the truth. You cannot reprimand your children. No, Johnny, you said you didn’t have a biscuit but those crumbs on your face and you did have a biscuit and you have lied. But Dad you said you read the terms and conditions”.  

Studies confirm what we already know that virtually no one reads the terms and conditions.   https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/07/nobody-reads-tos-agreements-even-ones-that-demand-first-born-as-payment/.   A study set up using a fake social networking site had clauses that anything the users shared would be passed on the National Security Agency and that the users’ firstborn child would be surrendered as a form of payment. 98% of the users didn’t notice the clauses.

All of us use several Apps and it would take 17 hours to read the terms and conditions of the 13 most popular Apps. https://www.pcmag.com/news/it-would-take-17-hours-to-read-the-terms-conditions-of-the-13-most-popular. It would take a lot longer to properly understand them because the wording is complex and involves a lot of jargon. The agreement is not optional, so it is take it or leave it. Accept that you will do without Microsoft, Apple, Zoom, WhatsApp, and Google amongst others. Become a hermit.

Websites also have privacy policies. One simple answer to our privacy problems would be if everyone became maximally informed about how much data was being kept and sold about them. Logically, to do so, you’d have to read all the privacy policies on the websites you visit. If you budget 10 minutes per privacy policy, you can see you are going to spend a lot of time reading policies.

It will be interesting to see how this evolves. Is this a satisfactory situation? Will there be a continuation of the status quo? Does this require the dreaded concept of regulation, or could the industry regulate itself with codes of conduct?

At least technology companies try and create the illusion of free will and agreement. However, when you work in a large corporate even that is dispensed with. There the large, value-adding, HR department is constantly creating new and more comprehensive policies. These are simply approved by the executive committee and then they are the law.

Because employees are so ingenious there is a constant need for new and evolving policies. This brings me to the tale of my retired colleague, Anton Vosloo. One of the generous benefits we received was free insurance on one car as part of our remuneration package. Of course, the value of the car that would be insured was capped depending on your level in the company. This also kept the HR department busy because every year they had to study the car market and determine what the appropriate wheels for each level in the company was. Then, of course, this needs to be approved by the executive committee. In the early nineties, cars with air conditioning were not allowed at the most junior levels. Yes, pampered millennials in our day we had it tough!

Once one reached a certain level of seniority it was deemed that the cap could be removed and the policy stated that the value of the car that could be insured was, “unlimited”. This was before the Anton gambit. Anton took delivery of a very well-deserved shiny new Bentley. There was a flurry of activity and consternation in the HR department. They suggested an appropriate cap for someone of his seniority. What part of unlimited did they not understand? His car was insured. Of course, a new policy was required and was duly approved. No longer unlimited. Anton, I hope you are enjoying a befitting retirement in Stellenbosch. The HR department needs people like you to continue to justify their staff establishment.

Given all this, I now realise that Ruminant Pink Friday ™ needs its own terms and conditions. I am a retired sole proprietor with limited means but there is lots of useful reference material and I have time. I have no doubt that my devoted groupies will click agree when the time comes.

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions and please keep them coming.

Regards

Bruce