5 ms·

Yeah, you're right about them not having to rewrite existing ones. They could've only inserted affiliate codes when there weren't existing ones. It's less that

• boneitis 2y ago
  > more that I'm unsurprised Bingo. You want to stick your lawyers on them and try to punish them and extract as much money as you can out of them? Fine. Whatever. >> not screwing over their partners and customers? I wasn't around to organically take in this situation, but being introduced to Honey by seeing this blow up today, I can only say: "...no? I don't think so?" Take, for example, the wild west days of rampant SEO exploitation (I'm talking like 2000s or 2010s era) and its race to the bottom, and Google's subsequent refinement of the SEO program over the years. Why am I supposed to root for one side over the other, again? Their bottom line purpose is the revenue stream; this is not a FOSS project that does so much as to not even solicit donations. -- I hope the top thread writer from that HN discussion five years ago is having a field day dancing on top of his I-told-you-so mountain :)
• kristofferR 2y ago
  No, cross site cookie reading were banned for a reason. A site can only read its own cookies now.
  • Dylan16807 2y ago
    It's a browser extension. It can check the current state of the store page.