121–130 of 130 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CBS All Access is US-only AFAIK, so I don't think GDPR is a problem for them
US and just launched in Canada too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It harms all the industries where the content is ad supported, which is the majority of the Internet right now. For just what I use every day Facebook, Spotify, Google, almost all news, Youtube, Reddit, and xkcd are all add supported. I get why people don't like ads but it's clearly how an absolutely massive portion of the modern Internet is monetized right now
> For just what I use every day Facebook, Spotify, Google, almost all news, Youtube, Reddit, and xkcd are all add supported. Out of all of those xkcd is the only one I like and I don't see any ads on it... The author does writes books though. > I get why people don't like ads but it's clearly how an absolutely massive portion of the modern Internet is monetized right now Maybe it just doesn't need to be monetised, ev…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is disingenuous to treat these as equally likely just to appear fair. Then it's a good thing that the comment explicitly wasn't doing that, openly unsure of the likelihoods.
Understanding how Firefox tracking protection works is one google button press away. If you tell me that the OP had the time, patience, and technical skill to list all those possibilities but could not do a basic check on how Firefox tracking protection works, and instead talks about how with Firefox tracking protection "plenty of honest parts of the internet would break", and how blocked domains are used "sometimes…
I don't think a basic technical understanding is good enough to know how it plays out in practice. Computers are complicated, humans are complicated, organizations are complicated, and I've seen many cases where people jump to unfair conclusions because they oversimplified a situation. I think that hearing from people with experience (e.g. people who have worked at a company like CBS or people who worked on Firefox's tracking protection feature or something similar) is much more likely to lead to an accurate understanding of the situation than trying to work off of assumptions.
Click the hamburger (3 vertical lines) in the top right corner of the screen I found it humorous that they simply call it 'the hamburger', and that they confused vertical with horizontal.
I always call it the hamburger menu, especially when doing tech support for everyone. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
They are at least giving people correct instructions to change this, unlike a bunch of sites that just tell people to turn off ad-blockers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great, then I can easily see that I do not wish to access your website! Ads should be blocked relentlessly until companies realize what reasonable, secure and tasteful ads look like, instead of the intrusive malware-ridden pile that interrupt our lives at the current time. Tracking, on the other hand, will never have a place in this world.
I mean, if you stop using their website wouldn't it be a good thing for bandwidth heavy sites like YouTube? It's kind of like a restaurant showing you the door and then saying "I didn't want to eat here anyways."
Better than one that tries to trick you, or tries to violate your privacy in secret, but bad none the less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be happy to accept denied access to most sites before loading their content. It'd be cool if browsers could send some sort of do not track header, that sites could then use to refuse to serve you any content. Assuming that they actually do want none of those users to consume their content in that way.
DNT headers are a thing. They were proposed by Mozilla originally, and its use was suppose to be opt in (and of course so is any compliance by the site in question). Then IE10 turned it on by default, making it pretty much completely useless as a signal for site owners.
IE10, Safari and Firefox all did sensible things. The industry just doesn't want sensible things, it wants to violate everybody's privacy uninterrupted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m assuming that this is paid access, right? Does the signup process mention this “hidden fee”?
There are two levels. One has ads. One doesn't. Presumably they're doing this to force their ad-viewing users to actually watch the ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think calling it entertainment is very flattering. I would call it distraction, or maybe even conditioned response.
I think the word you are looking for is “diversion”.