Pay us, or let us sell your info to 1200 partners

Comments

• Quicky@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  It’s the fucking Daily Mail, and should be completely avoided anyway.

  source

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Yeah, but sometimes you want to debunk it, or use it as a starting point for other research.

    source

    • Quicky@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Not worth giving them the traffic

      source
• hellfire103@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Moral of the story: don’t read the Daily Heil. It’s a racist, homophobic, transphobic, fascist, pseudoscientific crock of absolute shit.

  source

  • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I noticed people are actually starting to realise the Daily Fail is an absolute shitrag, so they’re posting links from The fucking Telegraph instead 😂

    Fuck me just get your tweed suit out and start shooting eastern Europeans grandad

    source

    • hellfire103@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      It’s infuriating, isn’t it.

      source
• nogooduser@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I always find the statement “we care about your privacy” to be a bit meaningless when they then say that they’ll share data with 100s of partners.

  source

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    They didn’t even bother to write that lol.

    source
• ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  And nothing of value was lost that day (why would you even want to read that rag?)

  source
• TheEntity@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Isn’t it illegal under GDPR? It seems to be the exact same thing Facebook tried to do.

  source

  • andrew_s@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I think they're all pushing their luck with it, trying to get away with it until any actual legal repercussions happen. I first saw this a while ago with a French newspaper - apparently the majority of newspapers there do it.

    source
  • bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Saw a German IT magazine that does the same Häupl report about a judge ruling that as being illegal a little while ago.

    source

    • JonnyRobbie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Yeah, some sites in the Czech Republic do it too, unfortunately. IANAL, so I don’t know if that’s illegal under GDPR, but I hope it is illegal and their luck runs out.

      source
• ThePyroPython@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  The Mail has less utility than toilet paper.

  source
• LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Don’t read this disgusting Murdoch rag

  source

  • purrtastic@lemmy.nz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I don’t think it’s earned by Murdoch, but otherwise agree with the sentiment.

    source
• Mwa@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Paid cookies opt out should be illegal

  source

  • Gurfaild@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    It probably is illegal in the EU, but I have no idea whether it would be illegal in the UK, too.

    source

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      As of last I checked, people are trying it out and seeing if they can get away with it under the way GDPR is enforced. Hopefully that gets hammered out in court.

      source
    • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      To my knowledge, the problem is the same in the EU, but there are legal initiatives by some NGOs (NOYB) that argue that having only these two options (pay for subscription or consent to personal information being sold) should be illegal, and that newspapers should be required to offer a third option (pay only the amount your information would be sold for, which is only a few cents, without the subscription).

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Mwa@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      True that would make sense

      source
  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Its not even an option. They will still use cookies even if you pay. They’d just use it for their own use

    source

    • Mwa@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      ohh

      source
• codapine@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Fuck the Daily Mail.

  source
• dsilverz@thelemmy.club ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Browser reader’s mode and Archive Today: hold our beers.

  source
• dev_null@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Purchase a subscription to not get personalised ads? So even when you pay, you still get ads, they are just not personalised.

  source

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Its the same thing Facebook came up with

    source
• henfredemars@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  How do you know they don’t just sell your data anyways?

  source

  • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    If they don’t already, they will. The insatiable desire for profit means that even if you paid them $1000 a month for their dogshit rag, they’d sell your data to make $1001 dollars.

    Regulations are the only answer and they have to be both enforced and punished heavily enough to not make it worth risking.

    source
• umbrella@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  or use firefox with ublock origin.

  ublock origin blocks most of these trackers.

  source