273
This is after forcing login to a store account:
At least they don’t hide in their ToS that:
“l agree to let Walmart monitor my use of Walmart WiFi, including to:
- Determine my presence in Walmart stores
- Associate information about me with my Walmart account
- Improve products and services
- Gather market insights about my in-store purchases and activities”
But that’s not enough, they need to monitor your internet activity further too.
For further reading, some greatest hits (the section headers on Wiki’s Criticism of Walmart):
- Local communities
- Allegations of predatory pricing and supplier issues
- Labor relations
- Poorly run and understaffed stores
- No AEDs in stores (automated external defibrillators)
- Imports and globalization
- Product selection
- Taxes
- Animal welfare
- Midtown Walmart
- Opioids settlement
Exactly. "Hey, we're gonna let you use our network. But if you do anything illegal or shady on our network, we'd be held liable. So we're gonna track what you do on our network to make sure if you do try something, we can remove you from the network and have proof."
I mean, yeah, they're also gonna collect advertising data, but do you really expect to have an expectation of privacy when using someone else's network? Just like they can film you in the building, they can monitor your network traffic on their network.
If this surprises you, maybe you should do some more research on how a network actually works. And get a VPN. And maybe don't connect to random public networks(you don't even want to know what OTHER PEOPLE can do to you on those networks, nevermind the company).
Also, you pay for your cellphone service, right? Are you paying for the wifi in the store? Nooooooo. They're giving it to you for free. Almost like they're offering you something in return for that data monitoring. Like they're offering you a service with a built in method to recoup costs... A service you voluntarily use and in doing so, agree to their terms.
Or you, you know, don't use it.
That is kind of the concept behind the internet. A bunch of networks passing packets along, using the same protocol, not asking questions about their content.
Fifteen years ago we had a whole battle and everyone other than the evils at the top were against deep packet inspection. This new generation is a bunch of bootlickers.
Yeah, wtf is going on here? You're allowed to say corporations shouldn't do things, even if they're technically legal.
Are these people such fierce libertarians that they support Eli Lilly's right to price gouge diabetics for their insulin?
Do you miss the part where you're not paying to use that network and it's offered as a free service? I'm old too dumbass. I remember before wifi even existed. Do you also go to Walmart and expect to be able to charge your batteries for free off their power? Or use their phones for free?
You're confusing free as in beer and free as in speech. No one is forcing you to use their FREE service. Use your own cellular network jackass. The network that you DO pay to use.
What's next, going to someones house and demanding their Wi-Fi password because "the Internet is free man!"
I mean, with that logic you might as well argue that this whole community is pointless because no one is forced to use any of the products or services that use an asshole design, free or not.
The purpose of this community, as I see it, is to point out anti-consumer practices used in existing products and services. While it could be intended to get the attention of someone who can change it, realistically it's an asshole design because they likely knew it wouldn't be well-liked from the start.
The purpose of this community as I see it is:
Walmart isn't obligated to offer wifi, but sometimes you can have a shit deal even when the price is 0.
Check this post out Buddah
Note the significant spittin’ of fax between the top and bottom rows of pixels
There were maybe one or two comments I think posted early on that made me think “wait, did I post this on CorporateJerk or HailSamWalton by mistake” 😀
Wal-Mart sux, public WiFi is not ideal, yeah duh now lemme poop on a particularly poor example of Fortune 50 behavior pls 😉
(Hmm by which I mean Fortune 1)
The issue being it seems they block VPNs based on the screenshot. At least that's what I am thinking this iCloud thing is
Which is still their right, with it being their network. The cost of using their bandwidth is letting them watch what you do with it. Don't like it? Don't use it.
Yes? Indirectly its baked into the cost of service.
While I get the sentiment, I can't help but picture the complaining customer "I PAY your wages" from that statement.
Because it is. The customer isn't paying for the hardware, electricity, or bandwidth. Dude above is a nonce.
Woosh...
What service? It's baked into the cost of collecting data. That's literally the exact reason they give it to you FOR FREE.
You really need to learn the difference between free speech and free beer. You're asking for free beer.
Correction, cost of goods is what I meant. I'm not going to Walmart just for the WiFi.
My comment was also meant to be sarcastic. Free WiFi while I spend my earnings, which I'd expect prices to reflect the cost of this service, in a giant metal box seems fair to me. Trading privacy as an extra cost I'm not okay with, so I won't use it.
Thanks :)
Not only is it baked into the cost of goods and offered as one of their services to attract customers (like “free” pick up), it reduces labor costs by showing customers which shelves to peruse to find their comic books and their chocolate milk. Their captive portal also serves as an ad for digital payment & their scan + mobile checkout offerings (coincidentally both enabled by Internet service like their Wi-Fi), which may increase retention and reduce labor costs respectively.