81–90 of 90 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plenty of those cookie banners specifically make it harder to opt out of inessential cookies, though. That part bothers me a lot.
That's by design, they want you to click on "I accept everything" without reading. It's the choice that the website owners did
Basically they initially say no data ever leaves the device but then they go on to say:
1) in case of a problem they gather detailed log data
2) They “may” store third party tracking cookies
3) Third parties will get access to my personal information (though they seem to promise they won’t abuse it) hmm
4) They directly write that they can’t guarantee the safety of my personal information
I think I’ll pass on this one.
Privacy policy: https://hush-1.flycricket.io/privacy.html
The extension was also posted here (where I originally posted the above comment): https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=trastknast
I find their privacy policy rather disturbing. Basically they initially say no data ever leaves the device but then they go on to say: 1) in case of a problem they gather detailed log data 2) They “may” store third party tracking cookies 3) Third parties will get access to my personal information (though they seem to promise they won’t abuse it) hmm 4) They directly write that they can’t guarantee the safety of my pe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU used the force and threat of law to force everyone who already should have been doing it to do it. A bunch of other people just jumped on the bandwagon.
It's a bit puzzling, why would you add an annoying banner for 'fashion' purposes? It's more work and if you don't believe it's useful (in this case to shield yourself from potential legal trouble) why would you do it?
It's management/legal saying "Oh no, we use cookies! We need a cookie banner!", even though the only cookie used is to track state or some such thing which doesn't fall under GDPR.
I find their privacy policy rather disturbing. Basically they initially say no data ever leaves the device but then they go on to say: 1) in case of a problem they gather detailed log data 2) They “may” store third party tracking cookies 3) Third parties will get access to my personal information (though they seem to promise they won’t abuse it) hmm 4) They directly write that they can’t guarantee the safety of my pe…
Author here. Apple requires you to have a privacy policy available online to even submit the an app for review. I used this from a generator I found online with the intention to update this one in the next app submission to point to the repo, but it blew up yesterday and just haven't gotten around to doing that yet. No bad intentions, what's said on the website is true, and you can verify that in the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s strange that even today, people are still not aware they should be using ad blockers with as many lists as they could live with. It’s no longer just about sanity and protecting attention, but now also about security, as we’ve heard more and more about malware running rampart from ad distribution servers.
Really strange is the anti-ad-blocking campaign saying they make browsing slow and are privacy unfriendly
For instance:
> you’re back to approving cookie access every single goddamn time you load an article at The Guardian
I honestly don't remember the last time I saw a popup there and I read it daily. I think the consent lasts quite a while.
Furthermore, the drivel about clever people, clever things… what? How is that related to blocking a banner that sites are legally mandated to have?
Doesn't make me want to try the extension, just makes me think that someone has just discovered adblock or was paid to write it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit puzzling, why would you add an annoying banner for 'fashion' purposes? It's more work and if you don't believe it's useful (in this case to shield yourself from potential legal trouble) why would you do it?
The key part is that many people do believe it's useful when it's not. It's management/legal saying "Oh no, we use cookies! We need a cookie banner!", even though the only cookie used is to track state or some such thing which doesn't fall under GDPR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's kind of the point. The solution is one by one blacklisting? If so it needs to be better than making tickets. What about a system to hide the elements manually and that action feeds into a database?
Have you ever looked at a blocklist? It’s literally thousands upon thousands of rules. And you blocking something shouldn’t add it to a list because what you block may not be what someone else wants blocked.
Some important privacy concerns with having that info reported back of course.
I'm going to check Hush out - I hope it works as intended. I've been using Safari as my main browser for a while now, and it has been a little (very) painful since the update that broke uBlock origin. It seems a pi-hole isn't enough! It would be great to browse the web without all the noise!
Under "Group Management", select "Adlists".