1000004515

Not sure how long this has been a thing but I was surprised to see that you cannot view the content without either agreeing to all or paying to reject.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    711 months ago

    FYI you should probably be blocking/whitelisting cookies client-side anyways. At the very least, disable third party cookies.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2311 months ago

    Refer them to the EU. EU is going after Meta for charging for an ad-free plan. Oh, right. The EU only goes after USA corporations and deliberately wrote their rules to exclude companies like Spotify. Oh wait, there was Brexit, so it doesn’t matter anyway. Brits voted themselves right to fucking shit. Kinda like what we might do in a few months.

    Vote. The stupid people definitely will, so it’s necessary to combat them.

    • wuphysics87
      link
      fedilink
      711 months ago

      And fuck abstaining on the basis of we only have two bad choices, I want a true leftist candidate. I would too, but by abstaining you are basically taking the bullshit liberal position of “I can’t tell the difference between these two things”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    811 months ago

    Daily mail does it as well. Cancer. But not hard to circumvent with Firefox and some extensions.

  • peto (he/him)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2211 months ago

    Just don’t read The Mirror. Generally not worth the effort of moving your eyes from one word to the next.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1111 months ago

    Get yourself the Consent-o-Matic browser extension and watch these “we and our 8000 partners (hungrily) value your privacy” banners disappear.

    If you stumble upon a web site that Consent-o-Matic does not handle, you can simply click the extension, click “Submit for Review”, and the devs will shortly add support for that site.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        You can customize how the extension handles cookie banners. See an example of current settings on most updated extension at time of this comment:

    • Andrew
      link
      fedilink
      1011 months ago

      I have this but it’s no good for consent-or-pay, unfortunately.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        Oof! I definitely can raise an Enhancement request in their GitHub to see if they can take on adding that functionality.

        If anyone can get me the exact link of whatever OP experienced, I can log it there.

        • riccardo
          link
          fedilink
          311 months ago

          if you need a consent-or-pay example, just open La Repubblica’s homepage. You will be prompted with the “accept all cookies or pay” prompt as soon as you open the site. Pretty standard practice for most Italian online newspapers, sadly

          • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Even UBO doesn’t work here. Zapping the element, just pops it back up. Crazy

            E: disabling js does seem to allow access to the site and articles, though you can’t interact with anything (comments and such).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      uBlock Origin has two cookie filters that are disabled by default. I enabled that and ditched the consent-o-matic extension

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    6311 months ago

    Lmao even if you pay, you still see ads, they just won’t track you. What an insane monetization scheme

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3211 months ago

      Actually they still track you, they just don’t share the information with advertisers. This is hte “pay or ok” model of blackmailing users to accept cookies and tracking. More or less what Facebook did last year, but Facebook charged a price tag that was higher than what Netflix costs! In the EU, this is not what was intended, and is currently being redefined

      https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2024/edpb-consent-or-pay-models-should-offer-real-choice_en

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Absolutely wild that they’re still allowed to call this “consent”

        If we imagine the idea of sexual consent being given in the same circumstances, it sounds a lot like a fucking crime.

        “Either you consent to having sex with me right now or you pay me a subscription fee in order to not consent. If you do that, I’ll still fuck you, but I’ll use protection”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          711 months ago

          I like this analogy; it’s provocative and it made me think about the issue for longer than I would have otherwise.

          However, after some thought, I don’t think it aligns perfectly since the user can simply choose not to read the article, so there’s an option where they don’t get fucked.

          In the same vein, I think we could make a better analogy to sexting. You meet someone, seem to hit it off, and when the texts and pictures get a little spicy, they hit you with a, “you can pay me now and I will keep all of this in my private spank-bank, otherwise I’m going to share our entire relationship with a group chat I’m in with 1200+ people”

          I think this is a bit stronger because it hits on a few notes where the hook-up analogy falls short: sharing of sensitive information, extortion in exchange for gratification, and the potential for an ongoing relationship.

          Idk, what do you think?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            Deutsch
            310 months ago

            the user can simply choose not to read the article, so there’s an option where they don’t get fucked.

            We are rapidly nearing a point where you can’t read online news from any major (ergo “widely considered somewhat credible”) source without one of those schemes. So I’d argue that the alternative is to just not get access to online news, and that may be considered too much pressure to still consider consent as voluntary.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            511 months ago

            I see where you’re coming from, but my understanding is that the tracking cookies are already on your machine when the banner is presented, so they’ve already put in the proverbial tip.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        410 months ago

        Sadly, newspapers are not considered “platforms”. A platform is a site that publishes user generated content, so lemmy or facebook. And not all platforms are large platforms too.

        So while this is a good first step, it doesn’t cover all online services.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      “But if we don’t track you, we lose all the money we’d have made selling your data to Oxford Analytics so they can help Putin convince your uncle to vote for far-right candidates?!?”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    611 months ago

    uBlock origin, can access the page fine, without showing any promts. I have more or less all filters turned on though (cookie popups, social media trackers etc)

  • Flyberius [comrade/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    GDPR, go gettem.

    You cannot share customer data with third parties without explicit consent. It has to be clearly labelled and not hidden in T&Cs

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        711 months ago

        UK also has GDPR. They left the EU after GDPR was passed and now have “UK GDPR” which is practically the same as the EU

      • Flyberius [comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        It’s still a uk thing. I was the GDPR officer for our company when it was introduced and as far as I know it hasn’t been repealed in UK law yet.

        Edit: Looking into it further it appears that we now have a UK GDPR law which is essentially the same thing and is in lockstep with the EU version.