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
  • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s the legal and compliance part the downvotes don’t understand.

    As a business, I would never operate an open-to-the-public network. The liability is too great.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      And what y’all legal and compliance people don’t understand is that we make the rules. Life is not just about complying with rules. It’s about making them too.

    • Prison Mike@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      How is allowing people to use a VPN a legal/compliance issue? If anything the traffic is exiting to the internet elsewhere and because it’s encrypted you can’t see what’s happening, essentially offloading responsibility to someone else while still providing access.