deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

If they can be obliged into respecting the cookie consent rules, they can be obliged to honor Do Not Track. It’s just a matter of turning it into law.

I’m generally skeptical of articles making broad judgments about entire age groups. Remember those “millennials are ruining [insert thing]” articles?

I don’t like that the post insinuates that the EU created the cookie wall headache. It’s sites that decide they absolutely need to set unnecessary cookies for which they need consent. Iirc websites have to show a ‘Reject all’ button on equal footing with ‘Accept all’ nowadays.

There are plugins like Consent-O-Matic that do the clicking for you. But the real solution would be that the EU mandates that if the browser sends a Do Not Track signal, websites should treat that as an implicit ‘Reject all’.

We seek out products that have received good reviews. Preferably lots of reviews and recently written. We’ve voted with our wallets and businesses have adapted.

Sure the feedback prompts are annoying. But we’re the ones who created the “problem”, and I can easily dismiss review prompts.

Since a business is at a competitive disadvantage if they’re the only ones not collecting high amounts of reviews, we’d need to level the playing field. I suppose you could create a law banning businesses from explicitly solliciting feedback, leaving it up to people to seek out a feedback form by their own initiative. But then you’ll have only complainers and people who are extremely enthusiastic.

I’m not sure you understand. Premium users still hear ads on this content. There are free open source apps that generate the same noise without ads.

White noise is literally just this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_noise

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I assume they’re doing both to make the censorship harder to circumvent. Even with an alternative DNS provider or a VPN that’s hosted in a country they have no authority over, the browser’s still gonna catch it.

The harder you make it, the fewer people will attempt it and the higher the chance is that citizens will mess up.

You’re saying France convicted people for terrorism purely because they used encryption? That’s a bold claim. What’s your source?

This might actually happen someday. Imagine: self-driving cars are the norm, car ownership is a thing of the past, you just hail an automatic cab and pay per ride.

In such a scheme the car company will probably know who you are, and the government could supply a blocklist of convicted criminals to prevent them from using their services.

deleted by creator

They can still go after GitHub and GitLab. Even if they self-host, they could go after their domain registrar.

deleted by creator

I assume the parties who financed his purchase would take objection to blatant sabotage.

deleted by creator

Why would they risk getting sued over helping the 0.0001% of their user base that’ll actually do this?

I wonder if it’d be more productive for them to just retreat from France. Show a different download page to French users that says it’s no longer available, but don’t geoblock the installer URLs.