81–90 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least the solution is obvious, even if the path to an ad-free web is not. And it's a solution that also has the advantage of being a solid public good.
The free internet of the workers and peasants? I mean, how will the websites make money?
Militarism, surveillance, propaganda, statism. Reminds me of something. Are we the baddies now ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They'll still surveil even if you pay for the product. Why wouldn't they? It's an additional income stream.
> Why wouldn't they? It's an additional income stream. If customers cared, the additional income from being someone who didn't surveil could outstrip the income stream from surveilling.
WHATWG wants to co-mingle document rendering with javascript (this is the real reason they are removing XSLT and not proposing a replacement, it skirts this enforcement) so that when you try to disable javascript or block tracking it breaks the document rendering, leaving the only option to leave Javascript enabled and ad blockers off. Other protocols gemini, gopher etc don’t have the same issues because they’re alre…
It wouldn't be that weird a thought for me that, preferably a group of, nation states cough up some serious money and give this a real start, beginning, and end in the form of a stable release. This already happens with major science and space projects, with budgets of billions. A browser is not simply a bunch'a software, having a modular open browser is a major deal and benefit to society at this point. Perhaps argu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The free internet of the workers and peasants? I mean, how will the websites make money?
maybe we're better off without websites that only exist to make money.
Should everyone be in a loss when they run a website?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do they have to make money?
So that the website... stays online? Have you bought a domain before or anything online before?
There is this disgusting belief in modern society that everything one does needs to generate money, otherwise it's not worth doing. Were we always like this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but surveillance is profitable outside of advertising, and advertising provides a perfect cover for surveillance: It's hard to make things that can separate third-party content from surveillance from third-party content for advertising, or for UI JS libraries for that matter
I'm tired of the feigned helplessness. Well gee this is the only way things can be. Internet doesn't work without surveillance! Guess you don't want the internet! /s Ads and surveillance are not inseparable. We don't need to accept surveillance as the price for a functional internet.
I once watched a news report about the then tail end of the Ceaușescu regime. One of the indicators of the level of oppression they described was that they had video cameras mounted on street lamps.
Why would they need to invest such insane amounts of money to acquire such tech (video cameras, lol, on street lamps) when they had a thriving population of curtain twitchers and snitches?