This is sad and yet another step backwards for Firefox. Yes, not many websites honored it, but some did and automatically set cookie preferences accordingly. There should’ve been more lobbying for this to become legally binding within the EU instead.
Legalism mentality is cringe, we need solutions that work against criminals who don’t care. When people push for legalist solutions it shows they have no real understanding of how the world actually works and just want to complain about what people should and shouldn’t do.
Shoulds are irrelevant in this world, people do what they want, even if it is illegal, in the digital world where there are way less clues left behind of illegal activity we need solutions that actually do something, like actually blocking those trackers, or feeding false fingerprint data that changes everytime or is exactly the same as other browsers.
Not expecting the providers to follow the law, they believe they are above the law until they get caught, then they’ll act apologetic and start doing it again.
Your assumption is based on the idea that these people are not criminals, which is wrong.
Feel free to go to some shithole in the middle East or Africa where there is no rule of law and see how that works out for you.
Your assumption is based on the idea that these people are not criminals, which is wrong.
They are not criminals until they actually break laws. Yes. That’s how rule of law works. That’s why there need to be laws that regulate them. Welcome to the real world.
Feel free to go to some shithole in the middle East or Africa where there is no rule of law and see how that works out for you.
Even you know that comparing digital cyber-crime and white-collar criminals to that is a horrible comparison, like comparing apples to oranges, but you weren’t hoping to have a reasonable discussion, you were hoping I wouldn’t notice this flaw in your logic and that it would simply shut me up. I know you and your type very well.
They are not criminals until they actually break laws. Yes. That’s how rule of law works. That’s why there need to be laws that regulate them. Welcome to the real world.
You think they’re not breaking laws already? You think these big tech white-collar businessmen aren’t already white collar criminals engaged in multiple types of crimes? You must be either very naive or just in-denial about it because they almost certainly are, and most act compliant and apologetic only after they get caught. Therefore a system that relies on them complying and not tracking you before they’ve been caught violating it, will not work. It’s exactly what they want because the other option, the better one interrupts their tracking regardless of whether they want to comply or not.
Even you know that comparing digital cyber-crime and white-collar criminals to that is a horrible comparison, like comparing apples to oranges, but you weren’t hoping to have a reasonable discussion, you were hoping I wouldn’t notice this flaw in your logic and that it would simply shut me up.
No, I was hoping you’d understand the differences between a place that follows the rules of law, and one that doesn’t. But given your previous comments that was already nothing but false hope, of course.
I know you and your type very well.
Oh yeah? What type would that be? Someone who’s standing up to fascists and terrorist simps?
You think they’re not breaking laws already? You think these big tech white-collar businessmen aren’t already white collar criminals engaged in multiple types of crimes?
You’re derailing, it’s not about whether they commit ANY crimes. The topic was very specifically about whether they break the law by tracking users and collecting their data, or whether it would be already illegal to ignore the Do-Not-Track feature. And no, neither of those things is illegal. That’s the point. The internet may fall under old laws too, but it created a bunch of new cases that do not fall under any laws. That’s also why we’ve seen the GDPR within the EU as some of the first means to challenge a lot of those “new” cases that are happening on the internet. Or the AI Act to regulate those fields since more and more places started to use this tech in ways that were highly problematic - but not illegal before that.
If we create new possibilities, then we also need to regulate those possibilities through new laws as well. This is really not a hard concept to understand.
Oh yeah? What type would that be? Someone who’s standing up to fascists and terrorist simps?
Average political troll like @[email protected] (banned now).
I mean you were literally banned for calling leftists radicalized terrorists, just like linkerbaan was banned for similar bad faith name-calling and accusations. Modlogs, they’re a very nice thing on Lemmy, even if you don’t have them on mbin.
Oh and before you start crying about being abused by mods and admins, I haven’t been banned from instances or communities for hate speech or aggression, mods don’t regularly tell me to stop doing that because it’s against the rules. I don’t have a modlog filled with aggressive comments calling people names or making repeated bad faith accusations that don’t hold any merit. If you don’t realize how the problem is with you and your behavior you’ll probably continue to be banned and have comments removed, adding to your reputation.
You’re derailing, it’s not about whether they commit ANY crimes.
It’s about whether they would, and they would and do which is why I called them criminals, and if we’re discussing the topic of DNT why’d you stop there? You realize that what I said about it is completely true.
Therefore a system that relies on them complying and not tracking you before they’ve been caught violating it, will not work. It’s exactly what they want because the other option, the better one interrupts their tracking regardless of whether they want to comply or not.
That a system which does not enforce their own compliance won’t work, and that they’ll love it because they can not comply and if they don’t get caught nothing will happen. It’s a system that does not work with the average big tech white-collar criminals who think they are above the law and only start giving a fuck after they get caught.
Whereas actually blocking their trackers (and advertisements in extreme mode) and feeding them false fingerprinting data does solve the tracking problem, better than asking them and assuming their compliance ever could.
Average political troll like @Linkerbaan (banned now).
I see you aren’t too bright then, considering I had this dumbass Nazi troll tagged even before switching instances. Maybe learn some nuance, something this platform could really use.
I mean you were literally banned for calling leftists radicalized terrorists
Except that I did not do that. lmao
I simply called out calls for literal murder & mob rule by the same people who are also Hamas apologists. But thanks for notifying me of even more mod abuse. db0 already tried to frame me earlier by completely twisting the words around, which I later called him out for, which I guess he took personally. This platform simply hates people who are speaking out against all the Tankies & terrorist simps on here, or saying “outrageous” things, like that murdering people you don’t like is bad. How dare me!
Oh and before you start crying about being abused by mods and admins, I haven’t been banned from instances or communities for hate speech or aggression, mods don’t regularly tell me to stop doing that because it’s against the rules.
That’s because you’re on the same of the extremist spectrum as the mods. Same reason why certain subreddits kept all the Nazi shit alive without banning users - except for those speaking out against it. And yes, that was also me. Funny, isn’t it? Somehow I get banned by both the Nazis and the Tankies. I guess if that makes me the problem, then I like being the problem, because I don’t like either.
I don’t have a modlog filled with aggressive comments calling people names or making repeated bad faith accusations that don’t hold any merit.
I’m not gonna be nice to all the extremists on here, sorry but not sorry. We’re globally past that point with where you all brought us now. Why would I pretend to be civil towards people who support genocide and murder? Who make excuses for terrorists and killers? Just because a large portion of Lemmy has lost their collective mind, does not mean that I’m going to join that bullshit mindset like some Lemming.
adding to your reputation.
Funny, your rep is at 161, despite having a much older account.Mine is at almost 25k.
Maybe me clashing with the extremest user base on Lemmy isn’t actually representative of the overall reputation of a user? Hm…
Maybe write a bit more than 6 pages worth of comments in a year and confront some questionable political positions on here and you understand what is actually happening when the bans come for you as well.
It’s about whether they would, and they would
Jfc…
If they would, they’d get fined, or worse if they end up being repeated offenders and depending on what they did. The world would be a lot worse if they did not care about laws, which is why you see such strong lobbying against it, and why other countries, like the US, are so much worse. Your argument is about as bad as the “both parties are the same and nothing changes” comments from the mentioned extremists here, which are just more lies.
How are you going to prove that this particular metric was used to fingerprint? That’s the issue I have - you can identify cookies, pixel trackers etc but there’s no way to prove whether a site uses a flag you send anyways. And enforcing something that can’t be proven is really hard - currently, not only the easy rules are enforced.
If it was law to abide to the Do Not Track setting, then a leak about a company dishonoring this would simply face massive fines, which is usually enough encouragement for them to abide.
Presumably it’s easier to lobby for something that’s already legally enforced elsewhere. And sometimes lobbying is just unsuccessful.
With a reasonable alternative available, removing the additional fingerprinting vector seems like the best idea to avoid tracking. The few good actors can look at the Global Privacy Control instead, so there’s literally no downside here.
It was like wearing a technicolor badge with flashers that said “don’t look at me” while playing the sound from Inception.
It made you more trackable because the entire ad industry ignored it. While there were a true, TRUE handful of sites that respected it, those are never the sites usually it was meant to deal with.
This is sad and yet another step backwards for Firefox. Yes, not many websites honored it, but some did and automatically set cookie preferences accordingly. There should’ve been more lobbying for this to become legally binding within the EU instead.
It was a double-edged sword. While websites could honor it, it could also be abused as another data point for fingerprinting.
Even more reason to make it legally binding.
Legalism mentality is cringe, we need solutions that work against criminals who don’t care. When people push for legalist solutions it shows they have no real understanding of how the world actually works and just want to complain about what people should and shouldn’t do.
Shoulds are irrelevant in this world, people do what they want, even if it is illegal, in the digital world where there are way less clues left behind of illegal activity we need solutions that actually do something, like actually blocking those trackers, or feeding false fingerprint data that changes everytime or is exactly the same as other browsers. Not expecting the providers to follow the law, they believe they are above the law until they get caught, then they’ll act apologetic and start doing it again.
Your assumption is based on the idea that these people are not criminals, which is wrong.
Feel free to go to some shithole in the middle East or Africa where there is no rule of law and see how that works out for you.
They are not criminals until they actually break laws. Yes. That’s how rule of law works. That’s why there need to be laws that regulate them. Welcome to the real world.
Even you know that comparing digital cyber-crime and white-collar criminals to that is a horrible comparison, like comparing apples to oranges, but you weren’t hoping to have a reasonable discussion, you were hoping I wouldn’t notice this flaw in your logic and that it would simply shut me up. I know you and your type very well.
You think they’re not breaking laws already? You think these big tech white-collar businessmen aren’t already white collar criminals engaged in multiple types of crimes? You must be either very naive or just in-denial about it because they almost certainly are, and most act compliant and apologetic only after they get caught. Therefore a system that relies on them complying and not tracking you before they’ve been caught violating it, will not work. It’s exactly what they want because the other option, the better one interrupts their tracking regardless of whether they want to comply or not.
No, I was hoping you’d understand the differences between a place that follows the rules of law, and one that doesn’t. But given your previous comments that was already nothing but false hope, of course.
Oh yeah? What type would that be? Someone who’s standing up to fascists and terrorist simps?
You’re derailing, it’s not about whether they commit ANY crimes. The topic was very specifically about whether they break the law by tracking users and collecting their data, or whether it would be already illegal to ignore the Do-Not-Track feature. And no, neither of those things is illegal. That’s the point. The internet may fall under old laws too, but it created a bunch of new cases that do not fall under any laws. That’s also why we’ve seen the GDPR within the EU as some of the first means to challenge a lot of those “new” cases that are happening on the internet. Or the AI Act to regulate those fields since more and more places started to use this tech in ways that were highly problematic - but not illegal before that. If we create new possibilities, then we also need to regulate those possibilities through new laws as well. This is really not a hard concept to understand.
Average political troll like @[email protected] (banned now). I mean you were literally banned for calling leftists radicalized terrorists, just like linkerbaan was banned for similar bad faith name-calling and accusations. Modlogs, they’re a very nice thing on Lemmy, even if you don’t have them on mbin.
Oh and before you start crying about being abused by mods and admins, I haven’t been banned from instances or communities for hate speech or aggression, mods don’t regularly tell me to stop doing that because it’s against the rules. I don’t have a modlog filled with aggressive comments calling people names or making repeated bad faith accusations that don’t hold any merit. If you don’t realize how the problem is with you and your behavior you’ll probably continue to be banned and have comments removed, adding to your reputation.
It’s about whether they would, and they would and do which is why I called them criminals, and if we’re discussing the topic of DNT why’d you stop there? You realize that what I said about it is completely true.
That a system which does not enforce their own compliance won’t work, and that they’ll love it because they can not comply and if they don’t get caught nothing will happen. It’s a system that does not work with the average big tech white-collar criminals who think they are above the law and only start giving a fuck after they get caught.
Whereas actually blocking their trackers (and advertisements in extreme mode) and feeding them false fingerprinting data does solve the tracking problem, better than asking them and assuming their compliance ever could.
I see you aren’t too bright then, considering I had this dumbass Nazi troll tagged even before switching instances. Maybe learn some nuance, something this platform could really use.
Except that I did not do that. lmao I simply called out calls for literal murder & mob rule by the same people who are also Hamas apologists. But thanks for notifying me of even more mod abuse. db0 already tried to frame me earlier by completely twisting the words around, which I later called him out for, which I guess he took personally. This platform simply hates people who are speaking out against all the Tankies & terrorist simps on here, or saying “outrageous” things, like that murdering people you don’t like is bad. How dare me!
That’s because you’re on the same of the extremist spectrum as the mods. Same reason why certain subreddits kept all the Nazi shit alive without banning users - except for those speaking out against it. And yes, that was also me. Funny, isn’t it? Somehow I get banned by both the Nazis and the Tankies. I guess if that makes me the problem, then I like being the problem, because I don’t like either.
I’m not gonna be nice to all the extremists on here, sorry but not sorry. We’re globally past that point with where you all brought us now. Why would I pretend to be civil towards people who support genocide and murder? Who make excuses for terrorists and killers? Just because a large portion of Lemmy has lost their collective mind, does not mean that I’m going to join that bullshit mindset like some Lemming.
Funny, your rep is at 161, despite having a much older account. Mine is at almost 25k. Maybe me clashing with the extremest user base on Lemmy isn’t actually representative of the overall reputation of a user? Hm… Maybe write a bit more than 6 pages worth of comments in a year and confront some questionable political positions on here and you understand what is actually happening when the bans come for you as well.
Jfc… If they would, they’d get fined, or worse if they end up being repeated offenders and depending on what they did. The world would be a lot worse if they did not care about laws, which is why you see such strong lobbying against it, and why other countries, like the US, are so much worse. Your argument is about as bad as the “both parties are the same and nothing changes” comments from the mentioned extremists here, which are just more lies.
How are you going to prove that this particular metric was used to fingerprint? That’s the issue I have - you can identify cookies, pixel trackers etc but there’s no way to prove whether a site uses a flag you send anyways. And enforcing something that can’t be proven is really hard - currently, not only the easy rules are enforced.
If it was law to abide to the Do Not Track setting, then a leak about a company dishonoring this would simply face massive fines, which is usually enough encouragement for them to abide.
So they just set up hosting for the site or service in a locale that doesn’t have those laws.
Now what?
That does not matter. If you operate within the EU then you have to abide to EU law.
It did basically nothing and just made you easier to identify and gave false sense of privacy. Good riddance imo
Presumably it’s easier to lobby for something that’s already legally enforced elsewhere. And sometimes lobbying is just unsuccessful.
With a reasonable alternative available, removing the additional fingerprinting vector seems like the best idea to avoid tracking. The few good actors can look at the Global Privacy Control instead, so there’s literally no downside here.
How’s that different?
GPC? It’s different because there’s already a jurisdiction that legally enforces it.
It was like wearing a technicolor badge with flashers that said “don’t look at me” while playing the sound from Inception.
It made you more trackable because the entire ad industry ignored it. While there were a true, TRUE handful of sites that respected it, those are never the sites usually it was meant to deal with.
Yeah, and I’ve been seeing more lately…
At least the forks will probably keep it…