• eee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    97
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago
    1. Rather than fighting against ad-tech , they’re caving. If someone comes into your house to punch you and rob you everyday, do you say “let’s find a solution that we’re both happy with, how about you rob me and don’t punch me?”

    2. We could have argued about how privacy-protecting this is, and whether it will actually prevent further intrusive tracking. Perhaps I might be persuaded to keep it. But the fact that I wasn’t informed about being opted in when upgrading, and the fact that the CTO is doubling down on “users are too stupid to understand this”, means they’ve lost any trust and/or willingness for me to listen to them. Turning this off for good.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      If someone comes into your house to punch you and rob you everyday, do you say “let’s find a solution that we’re both happy with, how about you rob me and don’t punch me?”

      I this economy? Of course not! I’d ask them to stop robbing me and keep punching me.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      45
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I don’t get all the fervor against ads. People are talking about kicking them out as if it’s so much more ethical than piracy. What they do is surround your house with billboards; of course you negotiate in that scenario

      • Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you’re the one paying for internet access, you should also have the right to determine the content that you’re paying to have access to. While something like pi hole could be used to metaphorically take down most of the billboards without impacting the ground below it, even everyday users should be informed about the data advertisers are getting from them, whether it is anonymized or not. Hiding an important setting about data sharing near the bottom of a page in settings doesn’t help anyone but the advertisers.

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          I agree that it would probably be much better if the setting was set by a pop-up instead (as they say, most users would treat it like a cookie banner anyway), though I still think it’s as morally reprehensible as piracy. If you think one of these aren’t fine, you probably should think the other isn’t either. Like you paid for the TV but the TV doesn’t pay for the cable package; blocking ads removes their revenue.

          • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t you also pay for cable. If I’m paying for a service I don’t want ads also served to me using it.

              • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                They had the same amount as modern subscriptions back when cable was as new as the Internet is today

            • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              If you’re paying for the cable package, yeah. But then you also have the free local channels. Most sites don’t require you to pay for them.