5 ms·

>But the pop-up won’t let us pass without clicking “agree”. Opting out is an illusion. I mean this is a weird way to phrase it but you definitely cannot partic

>But the pop-up won’t let us pass without clicking “agree”. Opting out is an illusion. I mean this is a weird way to phrase it but you definitely cannot participate in modern society without hindering yourself in various meaningful ways if you do not "opt-in" to giving up your privacy. "Opt-in" requirements have consequently struck me as "privacy theatre" which mostly irritates. I don't see any solution for the current privacy situation other than regulation and enough liability attached to data breaches to make hoarding customer data a good way to go bankrupt.

thaumasiotes 7y ago
>> But the pop-up won’t let us pass without clicking “agree”. Opting out is an illusion. You can generally just delete the popup from the DOM.
- dorgo 7y ago
  Idea for an addon: delete popups, delete overlays, fix scrolling ( which is often broken after deleting popups ). Is it possible to earn money with addons?
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > Is it possible to earn money with addons? Sure, if you lack your spine and moral compass. The business model is as follows: 1) Make a free add-on and have it gain popularity. Then, either: 2a) Inject malicious code into it that delivers malware/advertisements, making you money. or: 2b) Sell your add-on to a third party that will do 2a). If your add-on is popular enough, potential buyers will come to you themselves. Other than that, no, I don't think you can monetize an add-on directly.
- bmn__ 7y ago
  The content blocker extension uBlock Origin already comes with various annoyance filter lists maintained by end-user volunteers that do that automatically. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#installation https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#installation
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  True but fails to address the illegality, coercion, and vast multitude of users.
raxxorrax 7y ago
I think it is widely believed but you don't actually loose that much with opting out. It requires a lot of effort though and it probably shouldn't.
- b0rsuk 7y ago
  If it requires a lot of effort, how can you say you don't actually lose much?
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    Social media tries to insinuate that you loose out on current stuff, topics to talk about, the activities of your friends, it can prey on your insecurity and jealousness in general. But that is mostly not true in my experience. I meant it requires effort to resist these temptations and of course the more technical effort of defending against privacy invasions of large networks.
bmn__ 7y ago
The regulation already says that this kind of coercion is illegal and subject to admonishment and eventual fining. Sites that do not offer the equal choice between "continue with privacy intrusion" and "continue without privacy intrusion" are definitely out of compliance since 2018. Report them to ankle-biters like http://noyb.eu http://noyb.eu if you feel like making the world a little bit better.
- IshKebab 7y ago
  Unfortunately it isn't very clear about it at all, and it actually only talks about it in advice about the legislation - not in the main body of the legislation. It also isn't clear if you can do things like "Click here to continue for free with tracking, or pay to access without tracking".
  - matsemann 7y ago
    No, it's very clear. From the guidelines: > Consent will not be free in cases where there is any element of compulsion, pressure or inability to exercise free will
    - markandrewj 7y ago
      It should also be a law that customers can not be opted-in by default, or through consent buried in a 100 page TOS agreement. There should be a requirement that the question is presented to the user in a clear way.
      - zimpenfish 7y ago
        https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1528874672298&uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=15288746... Article 7 is the key bit, specifically entry 2: "...the request for consent shall be presented in a manner which is clearly distinguishable from the other matters, in an intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language." (edited to remove superfluous GDPR reference)
IanSanders 7y ago
Breaches are just part of the problem. You can have no breaches and no privacy at the same time

thaumasiotes 7y ago

>> But the pop-up won’t let us pass without clicking “agree”. Opting out is an illusion. You can generally just delete the popup from the DOM.

dorgo 7y ago
Idea for an addon: delete popups, delete overlays, fix scrolling ( which is often broken after deleting popups ). Is it possible to earn money with addons?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > Is it possible to earn money with addons? Sure, if you lack your spine and moral compass. The business model is as follows: 1) Make a free add-on and have it gain popularity. Then, either: 2a) Inject malicious code into it that delivers malware/advertisements, making you money. or: 2b) Sell your add-on to a third party that will do 2a). If your add-on is popular enough, potential buyers will come to you themselves. Other than that, no, I don't think you can monetize an add-on directly.
bmn__ 7y ago
The content blocker extension uBlock Origin already comes with various annoyance filter lists maintained by end-user volunteers that do that automatically. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#installation https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#installation
dredmorbius 7y ago
True but fails to address the illegality, coercion, and vast multitude of users.

raxxorrax 7y ago

I think it is widely believed but you don't actually loose that much with opting out. It requires a lot of effort though and it probably shouldn't.

b0rsuk 7y ago
If it requires a lot of effort, how can you say you don't actually lose much?
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  Social media tries to insinuate that you loose out on current stuff, topics to talk about, the activities of your friends, it can prey on your insecurity and jealousness in general. But that is mostly not true in my experience. I meant it requires effort to resist these temptations and of course the more technical effort of defending against privacy invasions of large networks.

bmn__ 7y ago

The regulation already says that this kind of coercion is illegal and subject to admonishment and eventual fining. Sites that do not offer the equal choice between "continue with privacy intrusion" and "continue without privacy intrusion" are definitely out of compliance since 2018. Report them to ankle-biters like http://noyb.eu http://noyb.eu if you feel like making the world a little bit better.

IshKebab 7y ago
Unfortunately it isn't very clear about it at all, and it actually only talks about it in advice about the legislation - not in the main body of the legislation. It also isn't clear if you can do things like "Click here to continue for free with tracking, or pay to access without tracking".
- matsemann 7y ago
  No, it's very clear. From the guidelines: > Consent will not be free in cases where there is any element of compulsion, pressure or inability to exercise free will
  - markandrewj 7y ago
    It should also be a law that customers can not be opted-in by default, or through consent buried in a 100 page TOS agreement. There should be a requirement that the question is presented to the user in a clear way.
    - zimpenfish 7y ago
      https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1528874672298&uri=CELEX:02016R0679-20160504 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=15288746... Article 7 is the key bit, specifically entry 2: "...the request for consent shall be presented in a manner which is clearly distinguishable from the other matters, in an intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language." (edited to remove superfluous GDPR reference)

IanSanders 7y ago

Breaches are just part of the problem. You can have no breaches and no privacy at the same time