3 ms·
I'm not trying to put any blame here, we can twist metaphors to support either side of the argument. I definitely think that websites have a huge responsibilit
by marcus_cemes 5y ago
I'm not trying to put any blame here, we can twist metaphors to support either side of the argument.
I definitely think that websites have a huge responsibility in keeping the user safe, but this feels to me like an over-extension of GDPR that will make websites much more difficult to develop in the future for the layman without a team of layers. It's a font, there was no malicious intent.
- ratww 5y agoBut I am trying to put blame: people who wrote the malware/spyware code are to blame. Similarly to people who write website code that leaks user personal information. The choice to embed third-party code was made by them. It is nowhere near reasonable to ask a common user to protect themselves from such things: they might not have the technical expertise. They might not be using their own computer (library, etc). The browser doesn't provide enough tools for it and requires third-party solutions. Third-party solutions can either cost money (Little Snitch), additional hardware (Pi-Hole), are not available in all browsers (uBlock Origin due to its interface) or require technical knowledge (other ad-blockers that use lists).