Well, so let's talk about what W10 is doing right now.
You are dismissing what somebody claimed to see W10 doing, because you don't think the source is trustworthy. Fair enough, but the privacy policy claims the exact same thing.
Now you are claiming that the privacy policy is just some fictitious document where MS writes every kind of stuff their client won't like to read, but they also won't bother practicing? Despite evidence (weak that it may be) that they are practicing it right now?
I'm not dismissing anything. I just pointed out that the exact source someone was citing itself leads with a warning that the original source is currently unverified and has been repeatedly challenged, which I thought was worthwhile since the HN poster citing it didn't mention that significant detail.
I'm also making no claims about the privacy policy being fictional or any of the other stuff you just made up.
Please stop putting words into my fingers that weren't even remotely there. It makes intelligent discussion impossible.
You are dismissing what somebody claimed to see W10 doing, because you don't think the source is trustworthy. Fair enough, but the privacy policy claims the exact same thing.
Now you are claiming that the privacy policy is just some fictitious document where MS writes every kind of stuff their client won't like to read, but they also won't bother practicing? Despite evidence (weak that it may be) that they are practicing it right now?