41–50 of 58 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's none of their business what websites I'm looking at, especially completely unrelated websites. Remove the re-targeting and tracking then they don't need to know who's looking at the page.
You probably use a debit or credit card for a lot of your purchases - don't you?
It’s too bad they can’t raise enough from donations to avoid this downward spiral.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably use a debit or credit card for a lot of your purchases - don't you?
Nope, I use cash. Besides "and yet, you participate in modern society therefore you must endorse all of its problems" is not a good take, IMHO.
So you admit to being an extremist then. You probably find problems with a great deal of the modern world as well.
You can't buy things online with cash. Your opinion on what people do online is therefore, colored significantly and is definitely out of touch with most people's experiences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's none of their business what websites I'm looking at, especially completely unrelated websites. Remove the re-targeting and tracking then they don't need to know who's looking at the page.
You probably use a debit or credit card for a lot of your purchases - don't you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, I use cash. Besides "and yet, you participate in modern society therefore you must endorse all of its problems" is not a good take, IMHO.
> Nope, I use cash. So you admit to being an extremist then. You probably find problems with a great deal of the modern world as well. You can't buy things online with cash. Your opinion on what people do online is therefore, colored significantly and is definitely out of touch with most people's experiences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couple reasons, depending on where those ads are: 1. If I search for diapers, and get ads for diapers, the usual pattern is to show the ads above the real search results, which tricks people into buying more expensive and/or lower quality products (after all, why else would the company need to pay to show up at the top of the search results?). 2. If I search for diapers on one site and get shown ads on a different si…
> which tricks people into buying more expensive and/or lower quality products > why else would the company need to pay to show up at the top of the search results? I dare say you do not understand how search results have worked for the past two decades. > then it follows that companies are trading information about me behind my back That is not how it works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, I use cash. Besides "and yet, you participate in modern society therefore you must endorse all of its problems" is not a good take, IMHO.
> Nope, I use cash. So you admit to being an extremist then. You probably find problems with a great deal of the modern world as well. You can't buy things online with cash. Your opinion on what people do online is therefore, colored significantly and is definitely out of touch with most people's experiences.
Interesting the Mozilla board interpreted "ease off the Google reliance money" to mean "become Google" The core of the problem is really in this very paragraph: > Right now, the tradeoffs people are asked to make online are too significant. Yes, advertising enables free access to most of what the internet provides, but the lack of practical control we all have over how our data is collected and shared is unacceptable…
> You can't advertise effectively and profitably without personal information. There are plenty of successful creators (e.g., on YouTube) that do exactly that, by getting advertisers to sponsor them. From what I understand, it seems to work pretty well. Those advertisements obviously can't use personal information, since they're part of the video.
There are some general ones who won't use targeted personal advertising, but for the most part, this personal information is why you will never see gym supplements being advertised on feminine beauty channels (despite channels being open to the money), or mascara products advertised on a gamer channel (again, despite them being open to the $$$).
Interesting the Mozilla board interpreted "ease off the Google reliance money" to mean "become Google" The core of the problem is really in this very paragraph: > Right now, the tradeoffs people are asked to make online are too significant. Yes, advertising enables free access to most of what the internet provides, but the lack of practical control we all have over how our data is collected and shared is unacceptable…
It used to be completely normal, and profitable, to effectively advertise without personal information. The idea that this is now required for advertising is just wrong, and shouldn't be accepted as such
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about the browser in Linux named Epiphany or sometimes Web? Was installed on a Phosh device of mine and seems ok.
That uses WebKitGTK, which is probably fine. QtWebengine uses blink but that's known to be insecure since Qt can't keep up with upstream (chromium).