I thought this was an interesting development. I haven’t seen the “you’re missing out on content because of your configuration” before.
You must log in or # to comment.
The companies are wastly overestimating how much I care about seeing their slop content.
The hatered for forced logins, age verification or prompts like these has been slowly curing my internet addiction. I’m not signing up or accepting your bullshit.
🤝
My old trick of ‘I don’t put up with this shit and go elsewhere’ still works great.
The Verge is a terrible source if you care about privacy. They have literally 100s of trackers embedded on every page.
The Verge has fairly good reporting, but all of Vox Media has that shit. To be honest, nearly every single page on the internet is filled with of this garbage.
https://www.voxmedia.com/privacy-policy/#cookies-tracking-technologies
They’re hit or miss. They aggregate a lot of the important tech news, but frankly, I wouldn’t trust them for anything important like figuring out what size and alloy of meat cleaver is the best for changing the SSD in my computer.
This is effectively a paywall. They want you to pay with your privacy. No thanks, I’m not buying.
NYT has some kind of weird thing that removes reader mode in Firefox when I try to turn it on. Using archive fixes it though.
Sometimes I think these companies lose more money in development costs than they would if they didn’t try fighting ad blockers.
I’ve noticed that on some websites! I prefer reader mode for most sites; I wonder if there’s a way to disable their ability to disable it.
I’ve seen that phrasing for years, it’s kind of the first level to entice you to agree
Though the whole thing here is an interesting twist.
I’ve never seen that for direct advertisements, only when an article was embedding a video with related content from an outside source like YouTube or Facebook. And it didn’t have to do with the ad-blocker but because I had rejected third-party/social media tracking cookies and those get set by the embedded media.
archive.today, maybe?
I think it’s just an ad; I don’t need to see it. I think it’s a new way to try to trick users into disabling ad-blockers.
deleted by creator
Turn off JavaScript in the browser?
This disables most of the web. I may as well use Gemini; I’d be able to access about the same amount of content.
If you use something like uBlock, you can specify which sites should have JS turned off and which should be on.
