51–60 of 645 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why even ask for the cookies if denying them doesn’t achieve much? It’s naive to think that cookies are the only tool used for tracking, but they are the most powerful tool for web based tracking.
Because EU Cookie Law was a flawed idea?
> I was pondering last night for which services I, personally, would actually be willing to verify my age or identity. > And… the answer is “none”. > At least, none that I can think of at the moment. Think back to the recent pandemic. Work? Online. School? Online. Recreational activities? Online. Talking to loved ones you don’t live with? Online. Birthday party? Online. Nonfood shopping? Online. Banking? Paying taxes…
Very few of the things you list are things that I do primarily online (even during the pandemic), and none of those are things that I can only do online.
I was sitting in a room the other day with a young adult, we were searching for additional algorithm learning materials. They searched in Google, and accept the cookies. They clicked on a website, and accepted those cookies too. They then started entering their email address to access another service. I was completely taken aback. I'm the sort of person that either rejects the cookies, or will use another site entire…
> It is the young people that are growing up conditioned to press accept There is a similar story with Ford and how they build pavement everywhere and taught the young population that roads are for cars. Now we have to drive for 10 minutes to get from one shop on the plaza to another shop on the different plaza.
It's honestly a reason why I don't use the service.
Related: this[1] current article/thread about privacy-preserving age verification. The author here seems to be commenting specifically on the type of anonymity-breaking age assurance widely being utilized along with the vaguely justified social media bans. Given the right technology to prove an age threshold but while preserving anonymity I'd be curious how their thoughts would change. For example, we've never seen p…
The question I'd ask myself is; who would _I_ trust to implement privacy preserving verification?
The only answer I can come up with right now is; myself. I would trust myself.
I was sitting in a room the other day with a young adult, we were searching for additional algorithm learning materials. They searched in Google, and accept the cookies. They clicked on a website, and accepted those cookies too. They then started entering their email address to access another service. I was completely taken aback. I'm the sort of person that either rejects the cookies, or will use another site entire…
To the sibling comments: don't "accept the cookies" and then delete them.
- - -
I'm super angry at what the web has become, especially at the OS browser community. There is 0 browser (that I know of) that can access the web safely and conveniently. Atm I use Firefox with uBlock which blocks the cookie banners, but Firefox's extension model is broken, and every single extension provides 100% access to my websites to whoever controls the extension. I don't like it.
We need a browser with a safe extension model.
- - -
edit: I guess using 2 Firefox profiles, one with uBlock and one with my google/facebook/bank/amazon/etc accounts solves the threat posed by uBlock and extensions. I still don't like it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the catch is that for both cases same backend provider is most likely used. persona for example. and you have no choice who will id your face.
I mean, if you live in a country where the state will delegate ID verification to a creepy company instead of having that as an in house capability you have more pressing structural issues to deal with.
and remember its like ratchet. there might be 99% of services that use inhouse face id, and its enough to have only one to leak your data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I buy liquor (well, I don't drink anymore, so THC seltzers), the liquor company isn't saving my ID to my profile and then following me around everywhere I go for the rest of my life shouting "This is MALFIST, he's 42! He buys alcohol! He also visited X Y and Z last week and had interests in A, B and C. He's annual income is six figures and buys expensive bourbon."
Not yet anyway. But there's nothing much stopping Google to offer a "verification" service to "help combat fake IDs" using a web connected camera at the till.
I was sitting in a room the other day with a young adult, we were searching for additional algorithm learning materials. They searched in Google, and accept the cookies. They clicked on a website, and accepted those cookies too. They then started entering their email address to access another service. I was completely taken aback. I'm the sort of person that either rejects the cookies, or will use another site entire…
I can't think of a single other use case in which I'd be willing to verify my identity. I'd rather go back to hosting email myself, and am fine with circumventing content access control for all other platforms for personal use.
We're seeing the world slide towards authoritarian strongmen, and we want to give them a massive index of who we are and what we do? I'd rather not.