3 ms·
> and just continue even paying for software which is hostile to them I went Apple precisely because it was not hostile at all compared to Windows and Google’s
by laurent92 5y ago
> and just continue even paying for software which is hostile to them
I went Apple precisely because it was not hostile at all compared to Windows and Google’s forest of adware. The minute you give me a non-user hostile OS (phone or desktop), I’ll PAY $300/year for it.
But even Ubuntu returned Amazon results when I searched the local application (Don’t get me started on technicalities of “But maybe you want your start menu to display your friend’s most recent purchases? How can Ubuntu know? But they’ve recognized their mistake after going to production and rolled back parts of it!”)
It’s time to stop blaming the user and start blaming the EU for their badly-written cookie banner laws.
- Kbelicius 5y ago> It’s time to stop blaming the user and start blaming the EU for their badly-written cookie banner laws. Are you saying that EU cookie law is to blame for software being hostile to its users? I can't see how that can be.
- AstralStorm 5y agoYes, blame the one law that attempts to give people a modicum of privacy, and not the developers really wanting you to click through and press accept all for income. The problem with beating dark patterns there specifically is the sheer number of them...
- denton-scratch 5y ago> badly-written cookie banner laws The law doesn't call for cookie banners. It calls for consent. I'm willing to auto-consent, because I use a cookie blocker. I think this plague of popups is temporary, and is going to abate; eventually the browser-makers will incorporate auto-consent, as they have incorporated cookie controls. And I believe that a lot of those consent popups are an attempt to annoy europeans into lobbying for repeal of the law. Ain't gonna happen - we're quite pleased with it.