3 ms·
Gooooooood. Now it's time to target the myriad of newspapers that have all chosen to go that same path - and even if you pay, you still get heaps of tracking c
by mschuster91 3y ago
Gooooooood.
Now it's time to target the myriad of newspapers that have all chosen to go that same path - and even if you pay, you still get heaps of tracking crap.
- freetanga 3y agoTurn off JavaScript. That works most of the time for me.
- coldpie 3y agoRather, use NoScript and use its allowlist as needed to fix poorly made websites.
- vincnetas 3y agoThe burden to fight this should not be shifter to end user. It's like saying buy a gun to ensure your safety. It's police job to ensure public safety.
- balozi 3y agoSay what now? Public safety and personal safety are two very distinct concepts that often coincided. But not always.
- ryandrake 3y agoA good compromise might be to shift the burden onto the browser. Browsers are supposed to act as the User's Agent, not as an enabler for web companies to do whatever they want. If browsers were actually doing their jobs, they would be rendering only what the user wants and dropping the rest into /dev/null. You wouldn't need dozens of extensions just to make the web sane.
- ajmurmann 3y agoThat still seems like a very unequal application of law. Newspapers -> disable JS, Meta -> even if you consent, it's illegal