> even though it may seem so - I have no privacy guarantees whatsoever.
I mean, fundamentally, really consistent security is hard; and the best you can reasonably expect from someone you're not paying is "best effort". For them to make real promises about security opens them up to being sued if they fail; it's not really reasonable to ask someone to do that unless you're paying them a reasonable chunk of cash to offset that risk.
Sorry, but this almost feels like a GPT-3 response to me.
I don't see what security, paid vs. free or best-effort has got to do with my argument, which is that the loopholes in legalese are so hard to spot for anyone but a lawyer, that effectively my data might still be used in any way and possibly against my wishes or expectations (but which becomes legal when I consent to the PP and ToC).
I mean, fundamentally, really consistent security is hard; and the best you can reasonably expect from someone you're not paying is "best effort". For them to make real promises about security opens them up to being sued if they fail; it's not really reasonable to ask someone to do that unless you're paying them a reasonable chunk of cash to offset that risk.