4 ms·

What's the disgrace?

breck 7y ago
Check the screenshot. That’s the user experience when I clicked this link. But beyond the UX, and the stupidity of saying “private browsing is reserved for our logged in users”, think of the hypocrisy here: they want us to support freedom of the press and anonymous sources but don’t allow us to read anonymously.
- zxexz 7y ago
  The New York Times does the same thing now, too. A scary dark pattern. I wish Incognito mode was less detectable, though I’m not exactly sure how that would work.
  - lokedhs 7y ago
    Qubes OS and running the browser in a disposable VM works. It should be possible to set up a lighter container with a browser whose data is completely wiped after the session competes for people who don't need or don't want to go all the way to use Qubes OS as their primate system. Surely someone must have built this already? If not, it would be an interesting project.
    - zxexz 7y ago
      Qubes OS is excellent for things like that, but not really something most people are willing to use. I love Qubes OS; especially being able to have a disposable Windows 7 template VM I can game with that has a PCI passthrough for my spare graphics card. Though, it's a bit heavy for my daily driver laptop. Also, re: your browser idea - checkout the sibling comment to yours on using Chrome with a temporary data directory.
  - oh_sigh 7y ago
    Why you can't just have all user profile data(cookies, local storage, browser history, etc) homed in a temporary folder that is deleted upon exit?
    - zxexz 7y ago
      I think that's probably the 'easiest' solution. Could probably write a quick extension too just for NYT.
- speedplane 7y ago
  > they want us to support freedom of the press and anonymous sources but don’t allow us to read anonymously. It's not that they don't want people to read anonymously, it's that they don't want people to read without paying. If there were an easy and anonymous way to pay for reading publications like the NYTimes, I'd bet the NYT would support it. Okay, okay ... I know NYTimes is a big corporation, and like any other, they love sucking up as much data they can about their users, so they probably won't do this. However, without an easy and anonymous payment system, NYTimes still has moral cover for their behavior. The bottom line is that people should pay for what they read and providers should not require more than that. There's plenty of technology that can handle this relationship, it's just that most people don't.
  - FakeComments 7y ago
    Bull. The NYT could make ad money without the tracking, because content relevant ads have always been more productive and the NYT knows their content. They just want the data.

Check the screenshot. That’s the user experience when I clicked this link. But beyond the UX, and the stupidity of saying “private browsing is reserved for our logged in users”, think of the hypocrisy here: they want us to support freedom of the press and anonymous sources but don’t allow us to read anonymously.

zxexz 7y ago
The New York Times does the same thing now, too. A scary dark pattern. I wish Incognito mode was less detectable, though I’m not exactly sure how that would work.
- lokedhs 7y ago
  Qubes OS and running the browser in a disposable VM works. It should be possible to set up a lighter container with a browser whose data is completely wiped after the session competes for people who don't need or don't want to go all the way to use Qubes OS as their primate system. Surely someone must have built this already? If not, it would be an interesting project.
  - zxexz 7y ago
    Qubes OS is excellent for things like that, but not really something most people are willing to use. I love Qubes OS; especially being able to have a disposable Windows 7 template VM I can game with that has a PCI passthrough for my spare graphics card. Though, it's a bit heavy for my daily driver laptop. Also, re: your browser idea - checkout the sibling comment to yours on using Chrome with a temporary data directory.
- oh_sigh 7y ago
  Why you can't just have all user profile data(cookies, local storage, browser history, etc) homed in a temporary folder that is deleted upon exit?
  - zxexz 7y ago
    I think that's probably the 'easiest' solution. Could probably write a quick extension too just for NYT.
speedplane 7y ago
> they want us to support freedom of the press and anonymous sources but don’t allow us to read anonymously. It's not that they don't want people to read anonymously, it's that they don't want people to read without paying. If there were an easy and anonymous way to pay for reading publications like the NYTimes, I'd bet the NYT would support it. Okay, okay ... I know NYTimes is a big corporation, and like any other, they love sucking up as much data they can about their users, so they probably won't do this. However, without an easy and anonymous payment system, NYTimes still has moral cover for their behavior. The bottom line is that people should pay for what they read and providers should not require more than that. There's plenty of technology that can handle this relationship, it's just that most people don't.
- FakeComments 7y ago
  Bull. The NYT could make ad money without the tracking, because content relevant ads have always been more productive and the NYT knows their content. They just want the data.