I wrote one sentence about how "there are ways for companies to go too far", which I think is pretty dang uncontroversial and trivially-true. However that user replied with what is clearly a disagreement, with corporate justifications and placing sole responsibility on employees to avoid the hardware.
This leads to two competing options:
(A) They simply can't imagine any scenario where a company might "go too far" and be at fault.
(B) Their stance is much milder, but for some reason they are replying to a straw-man argument that isn't what I actually wrote.
Of those two ambiguities, I went with (A), but if you think (B) is a more-charitable reading...
Or that the discussion was about information on and being transmitted through the devices and I was limiting my opinion on "there being nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware" to that scope, and not extending it to include spying on people in their homes using the device peripherals.
No, they shouldn't be flicking on your laptop camera or mic remotely, as these are pretty obviously violations of your privacy.
