This has to be against some kind of law right?

    • Fijxu@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      24 days ago

      I always do this when I can’t see a page. I also do it when they pop out a big box with text in the middle of the reading and if they also pop out a big box begging me to accept the cookies.

    • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      The website doesn’t really care; they have hosting costs so if you’re not paying with money or by accepting ads then to them you’re worse than not visiting at all as you consume resources, so it’s good if you leave?

        • 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          Sure, but people have memory and if you block people who aren’t even going to contribute to the running costs of the site via the channels they provide, never mind profit, then from the site owners perspective it’s pretty great if you recognise it as a site you don’t want to visit as you likely won’t come back

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      24 days ago

      ublock origin has an annoyance list you have to manually enable, but it works wonders to get rid of those.

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    25 days ago

    Don’t worry, once they have your credit card number they’ll track you even more. At best you’ll get a £‎2.35 cheque from a class action lawsuit in seven years, assuming they ever even get caught.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 days ago

      Yeah, they’ll still collect your data and happily sell it as soon as your subscription ends. Also, this subscription would likely only cover first-party tracking. It wouldn’t cover things like a Facebook Like button being embedded in the site, which allows Facebook to track you.

  • Hellfire103@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    25 days ago

    Moral of the story? Don’t read the Express. To quote Dave Gorman, it’s a crock of shit.

  • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    This has to be against some kind of law right?

    Only in the EU.

    Anyways I think that “pay or consent” model isn’t that bad. You either pay with your data or your money. Seems fine to me though pay only would be better. Everyone is used to getting everything online for free. It has to change now imo. The internet isn’t a bunch of hobby forum projects anymore. The price of running a popular website is big and idk if privacy-respecting ads can give enough profit at this point.

    • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Nederlands
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      It is bad. Companies could just have some fucking standards.

      The issue is profit-motivated companies existing in the first place.

      Rather, they should be self-led, and motivated towards the best labour environment as according to their workers. That means their workers feeling accepted, heard and listened to, being able to not only live but also thrive. And all that, while still making the organisation more efficient.

    • ⲇⲅⲇ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      25 days ago

      You can show ads without tracking and keeping users their right to privacy, right? I think it’s different selling user data than having some ads on your website.

  • zerozaku@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    24 days ago

    Hey that’s a lot better than companies who asks you to pay and still share your data for profits

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 days ago

    They want you to pay for the cost of the website you’re accessing.
    Which is reasonable.

    And you can choose whether you want to pay with money or with your data.

  • zwekihoyy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    24 days ago

    I mean, if you don’t want to participate in the advertisement based monetization model, which you shouldn’t, then the alternative to it is a subscription model.

    these sites aren’t free. we have the right to block advertising content and trackers on our browsers but that doesn’t mean we have the right to block advertising while retaining no payment access.

    • kirk781@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 days ago

      Err, this payment doesn’t block ads. It only switches off personalised ads. So, the user is still seeing ads, just not targeted ones. So the site is getting both user’s money plus ad money. And technically, I am not sure how privacy preserving this is because you will still need to create an account which technically leaves you vulnerable to tracking.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      24 days ago

      Yep. I wish more services asked for a nominal fee and just skipped the ads and data harvesting. They don’t make much per user anyway, so just let us pay the few cents directly and skip the bullshit.