opt-in

The people who would benefit most from it seem the least likely to opt-in to optional features.

All companies should be legally required to make those invasive privacy settings opt-in and not opt-out...

Sorry, but mildly put, your definition of opt-in seems to be an unrealistic one.

Advertising would have a better claim at moral neutrality if it were explicitly opt-in.

I couldn't find anything about the dictionary, admittedly I didn't look very hard, but iMessage is opt-in.

It does seem rather evil to make this opt-out rather than opt-in.

That seems like a poor example of something that should be opt-in.

I appreciate the effort but DNT will remain an opt-in for me, not a weak opt-out based on purely on trust.

If you don't use it, it will just be a button in your toolbar, it will do absolutely nothing before you opt-in, by making a call.

Funny that they won't even apply this philosophy to their own products and services that they are forcing into user installations without an opt-in or opt-out.

But a company using resources of their customer for their own private purposes without a very clear, up front and explicit opt-in is quite new and radical.

Well, opt-in immutable dict would be awesome.

If the goal is "no surprises", then users should be made aware of this feature and allowed to opt-in or out easily.

Imagine that people of the future could opt-in to the virtual nation that suits them best.".

Your opt-in point is a powerful one, because it's not actually countered by the intuitive "but no one would do that".

So did spotify, if they didn't then no one will opt-in not because they care about their "privacy" but because it takes effort and knowledge.