I want to agree with you, really.. but the realistic person in me says that it is likely that if you don’t keep the data, someone else will find a way, because getting the data seems to be irresistible as a form of control and advantage.

So maybe not playing doesn’t really work.

I was thinking, in regards to some grandparent way up there, the same statement “don’t play” might have been true for Oculus in general.

What I mean to say is, don’t sell the company, ever. Then you can “control the outcome”.

Ah, but there lies another fallacy. You really can’t control the outcome even if you try to. Even if you don’t play, likely someone who wants to do the same thing as you, and exploit it, will find a way. Or maybe on their own, Oculus would have never found the right supporter who would honor privacy. Even if they had.. the below could happen.

For example, if Facebook hadn’t bought Oculus, maybe they would have bought the Vive product line from HTC (a bit far fetched) and compete against Oculus.. and then done the same privacy intruding measures.

So even if Oculus had held out and didn’t “play”, they might have been crushed anyway or the privacy problem could have just happened somewhere else.

I’m not saying we should give up trying to protect privacy and “play” the game... but that somehow in the competitive environment we are in, those playing the game are winning more over those who wish not to.