7 ms·
I really like how that site solved the problem of visitors that don't accept tracking. I got a challenge asking me to accept cookies, out get the just-text vers
by TomasEkeli 6y ago
I really like how that site solved the problem of visitors that don't accept tracking. I got a challenge asking me to accept cookies, out get the just-text version.
No images, no scripts, no cookies, no styling. Just the text. What a great thing!
- thepangolino 6y agoThe question I keep asking myself is why tracking and cookies can't be handled at the browser level?
- xingyzt 6y agoIt's exactly how the text-only Lynx browser handles them. I really wish Firefox would implement the same thing.
- tsimionescu 6y agoYou can configure your browsers not to accept any cookies, or not to accept 3rd party cookies. These may or may not break many sites. Tracking more generally is not something that can be prevented by a browser which executes code written by the tracker, and must give that code access to the internet. Even if the SOP was completely enforced, trackers can still store the information on the origin server. Even if the browser doesn't expose any tracking information, the tracker can still measure all sorts of information which may be unique to your system, especially in concert with your IP address.
- the_other 6y agoOne facet of this: the dominant browser manufacturer is the dominant tracking body.
- benibela 6y agoIt also handles NoScript well Text, images, and no scripts
- jwilk 6y agoWhen I disable JS with UBlock Origin: • the "Agree and Continue" button does nothing; • the "Decline and Visit Plain Text Site" button directs me to the article index at https://text.npr.org/ https://text.npr.org/ (instead of https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=858800112 https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=858800112) Perhaps NoScript special-cases this site?
- benibela 6y agoIt does not work in private mode Perhaps I had opened the page without noscript in the past, and it still had the relevant cookies