Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 314 posts

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#181

Post by marmaduke »

mirimir wrote: post #13

I see the same behavior (v52.8.0). Damn. Also, from a German IPv4: > The new European data protection law requires us to inform you of the following before you use our website: > We use cookies and other technologies to customize your experience, perform analytics and deliver personalized advertising on our sites, apps and newsletters and across the Internet based on your interests. By clicking “I agree” below, you c…

Maybe you will appreciate NPR,

https://choice.npr.org/index.html?origin=https://www.npr.org...

which provides a plain text site alternative

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#182

Post by wastedhours »

Bud wrote: post #47
bscphil wrote: post #30

Why are different organizations taking such an affront to Firefox's tracking protection? I don't have this problem at WaPo with uBlock + uMatrix. As far as I understand it only takes effect by default in private browsing mode. I think it's more crucial than ever that everyone use adblockers and refuse to support sites that retaliate with anti-social behavior. Yes, news orgs need funding, but there's no requirement th…

I tend to agree with you. But do you have an alternative model ready? And if not, how much of the news media are you willing to let die off completely before you would relent?

I think one of the saddest parts of the ad-model now is the lack of money making brands essentially ship off their sales departments to the programmatic companies - if they went back to a genuine, intent based, direct sales approach for advertising it wouldn't be as much of a shit show.

With newspapers, the news is backed up by the ad opportunities on the lifestyle content. After I'm done browsing the headlines, I can then go to the holiday section, and I'm getting holiday ads (which actually might be helpful), if I'm browsing the food section, I'm getting supermarket offers (which might also be helpful).

Browsing a modern news site, I might be reading an article on the latest terrorist massacre, but be being served ads for hats. It's this requirement to break someone's focus that's turned ads into such an interruptive medium. Tracking can be helpful, but without knowing the context the ad is being served in, the incentive is to be as invasive as possible.

It's why content marketing seemingly works - the "ad" (subscribe, join now CTAs within the articles) feels natural because it's complimentary to the content you're reading, not trying to fight it.

I'm not sure if it'll be them, but organisations like Buzzfeed or if NYT integrates Wirecutter more, might be on to the right model. Lifestyle content with intent based ads around them (with a higher CPM due to, assuming, a higher conversion rate), that supports the hard news side.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#183

Post by michaelt »

komali2 wrote: post #113
sadtruth wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Jeff Bezos pays out of pocket?

Why?

It's traditional for the super-rich to buy newspapers and run them at a loss to advance their pet political causes; give favourable coverage to their friends and business interests; and flatter them by including them in celebrity coverage.

This tradition is literally older than America.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#184

Post by jillesvangurp »

johnnylambada wrote: post #20
larkeith wrote: post #8

Any time a site asks me to disable tracking protection, it has the curious effect of reinforcing my desire to leave it enabled - that site has made it clear that they are intentionally and unapologetically violating my privacy for a quick buck.

the problem with this line of thinking is that newspaper people need to actually make a buck. Or else there are no newspapers.

The problem is that newspapers are leaving money on the table. I'd sign up for a Netflix style subscription service that offers me access to a broad range of media. I have a Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Spotify subscriptions as I'm sure many here do. That's good value for money. Netflix is making way more than I ever spent on dvds & cinema visits combined. Same for Spotify.

As it is, all I have is paywalled niche news sites each thinking they can charge similar fees for very limited access to just they tiny corner of the market. I'm not going to pay per article. I haven't bought a news paper in years. I get all my news through ad sponsored crappy websites. Because they are so offensively bad, I have adblocking, tracking prevention, and other extensions trying to limit my exposure. Works great for me

So, that's money not spent by me or millions of other users that news papers are neglecting to make.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#185

Post by damon_c »

andai wrote: post #160
johnchristopher wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how things happened. First they came with the blink tag. Then they added animated GIFs everywhere. They came with the pop-up. Then they put the pop-up under the main window. Ad-blockers' first usage was to make the Web readable. Then years later privacy concerns took over.

At this point, ads are just one of many problems. Newsletter popups, cookie consent (10x worse since GDPR), auto-playing video, in-browser crypto mining..? At this point, basic self-respect demands I simply disable JavaScript. It's incredible how much faster the web is without it, and how much smoother, and how much less cluttered.

> cookie consent (10x worse since GDPR)

Traveling to different countries makes cookie consent an amazingly broken thing. Every website needs an "ok" button clicked every time you arrive in a new place.

How did we get here? Did people vote for this?

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#186

Post by a_f »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #121
reaperducer wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am poor but I am willing to pay as much as 5 dollars a month. So subscribe to your local newspaper. One of my subscriptions is $25/6 months of Sunday delivery and you get free unlimited online access. That's $4.16/month — below your stated budget. If more people put their money where their mouths are, then we could break the media of their third-party ad serving addiction.

I do get one print newspaper at home. But I want to consume a wide variety of news sources, and a wide variety of news sources want me to consume their news, so I don't think there is anything wrong with demanding that I pay per article from any source.

I wonder if you could create a service like Netflix or Spotify for Newspaper articles? Where the newspaper/journal get a fee for publishing through the service and the users get ad free access to the articles. This would only be successful if you could get almost all publications in though.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#187

Post by xte »

WP reader should then write down a simple letter, perhaps a paper one, to the journal saying that they pay for a journal not for feed a company milking data from then. A simple claim: "I'm a Citizen, not a (paying) lemon to be squeezed".

A simple cease and desist invite.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#188

Post by pthreadses »

damon_c wrote: post #185
andai wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, ads are just one of many problems. Newsletter popups, cookie consent (10x worse since GDPR), auto-playing video, in-browser crypto mining..? At this point, basic self-respect demands I simply disable JavaScript. It's incredible how much faster the web is without it, and how much smoother, and how much less cluttered.

> cookie consent (10x worse since GDPR) Traveling to different countries makes cookie consent an amazingly broken thing. Every website needs an "ok" button clicked every time you arrive in a new place. How did we get here? Did people vote for this?

I travel quite frequently between the EU and the US and occasionally elsewhere - I've never seen a new OK button when I arrive in a new location. Can you provide an example of this?

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#189

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

andai wrote: post #160
johnchristopher wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how things happened. First they came with the blink tag. Then they added animated GIFs everywhere. They came with the pop-up. Then they put the pop-up under the main window. Ad-blockers' first usage was to make the Web readable. Then years later privacy concerns took over.

At this point, ads are just one of many problems. Newsletter popups, cookie consent (10x worse since GDPR), auto-playing video, in-browser crypto mining..? At this point, basic self-respect demands I simply disable JavaScript. It's incredible how much faster the web is without it, and how much smoother, and how much less cluttered.

The problem is, the people who shape the web, of which some are on HN, will soon notice that people are just switching off JS to evade their tricks, and will make sure websites are unusable without it. Now the opposite is true, but some already implemented loading loading the text via JS, so you can't just read an article without turning on JS first.

Re: Tell HN: Now Washington Post is asking to turn off Firefox's tracking protection

#190

Post by lucasverra »

gaius wrote: post #93
Bud wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to agree with you. But do you have an alternative model ready? And if not, how much of the news media are you willing to let die off completely before you would relent?

But do you have an alternative model ready? I was a subscriber to the NYT until recently, had been for over a decade. They don’t track subscribers any less, or show fewer ads. So I tried the alternative but they were too greedy. Also you can’t cancel a sub online you have to phone them! Or just cancel it on the credit card side...

Same with lemonde.fr last year. They wanted ME to send an analog letter to their unsub service. I wanted to kill somebody but

What i did:

1)switched the payment method to a virtual credit card (revolut)

2)that i made instantly disappear once it was on their server. They are dumb enought not to have a register of my previous payment method

3) LOL at their email "We cannot charge you"

Post reply on HN