this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
677 points (98.3% liked)

Privacy

31868 readers
258 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 173 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Thanks for caring about my privacy, CNN, sorry I couldn't be more helpful in facilitating your solid privacy measures.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 53 points 9 months ago

You can be more helpful, though.

Go to a different website.

[–] littlebluespark@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If it were working "as intended", the site wouldn't know you're there. 🤌🏼

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough.

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago

"You can totally trust us bro"

[–] nailoC5@lemy.lol 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Does this crap still appear when you disable JavaScript?

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

I would never do that to CNN.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BlanK0@lemmy.ml 139 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Lmao, "required componentes to protect your privacy" 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 52 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

You see what they're actually doing there?

"We are by law forced to give you the option to view our ads and accept our tracking, because of privacy legislation in your region. Since you are hindering us from doing so, you can't come to the birthday party".

Ok, thank you EU, I suppose! :)

[–] grue@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Pretty sure CNN is (willfully) misinterpreting the law. The EU is definitely not prohibiting them from just turning off the tracking without providing a choice.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but the average reader can't make that distinction and blames EU.

The joke is that CNN still violates GDPR with this trick.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 7heo@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago
[–] Underwaterbob@lemm.ee 61 points 9 months ago

Hahaha! "We need access to your private data to protect your privacy." We've come full circle.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 51 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Welcome to the Corporate Internet.

Get ready to play by Their Rules on Their Services.

Good thing a lot of them are useless fucking Dinosaurs like CNN that need to die anyway.

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

Not today.

Not.

Today.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 38 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Youtube just recently started giving me issues on Librewolf. I actually paid for Youtube Premium for quite a while, let it lapse a couple of months ago, and I've been just watching with the ad blocker on. Having to go back to running stuff through Google Chrome and watching ads made me want to research "how can I watch videos without Youtube being involved" for the first time.

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 35 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Piped: piped.video Invidious: yewtu.be

Those would be good places to start, if you still want YouTube content without the YouTube front-end.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 29 points 9 months ago (8 children)

It might be a little surprising given what I literally just said, but I am not unreservedly in favor of just grabbing someone else's content from someone else's server and then playing it without the ads that pay for the hosting bills for the origin server.

I realize I'm probably in the minority in that, but I feel like a fully off-Youtube video hosting solution might be a better way.

[–] randomname01@feddit.nl 16 points 9 months ago

I get what you’re saying, but the simple fact is that most of the content is on YouTube. An alternative would be better (and PeerTube might get there one day), but you’d be very limited in your choices if you avoided YT entirely. Also, I can’t personally feel too bad about “stealing” from YouTube.

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 12 points 9 months ago (9 children)

In this case, the someone else is Alphabet megacorp. I wouldn't waste any concern on them. The content is still hosted by YouTube, just played through the invidious instance.

To do away with all those concerns, you could self-host invidious, or donate to the instance you choose to use if self-hosting is outside of your technical prowess. If you want to support certain creators, donate to them directly instead.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I just bought a Nebula subscription. I can’t say they’re a replacement for YT, but they have good content.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 6 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I was gonna say something about Nebula / Curiositystream. I actually think that that + somewhere to play music would take care of 95% of what I use Youtube for.

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think that's a very valid point, because that's literally what Google does with AMP links...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

is it just me or 3rd party instances really so slow thats unwatchable?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 10 points 9 months ago (3 children)

no issue with firefox and ublock origin just yet over here

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 9 points 9 months ago (3 children)

A super lightweight option for viewing videos that I don't see mentioned often is drag and dropping the link into MPV.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RmDebArc_5@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lars@lemmy.sdf.org 29 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Tangentially, CNN does have a text-mostly version: lite.cnn.com

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Huh. Must be leftover from the early days of the mobile Internet. Kinda like Reddit's old mobile site (which now just redirects to Reddit's current mobile site).

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 27 points 9 months ago (6 children)

CNN Management: I’m worried that since our purchase by a right-wing nut job and our spectacular idiot explosion of the last CEO, that we’re still in danger of being considered a valid corporate news outlet. What can we do?

CNN Schmuck: We could force mandatory tracking and ads on all website visitors.

CNN Management: Brilliant!

toilet flushing noises

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] const_void@lemmy.ml 26 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago
[–] roscoe@startrek.website 25 points 9 months ago

Turning off Java script worked when this happened to me. Firefox and ublock origin. It breaks some things but you can do it on a per site basis.

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I haven't really looked into it too much, but... Aren't they actually right in this case?

Sure, reading "we can't protect your privacy because you're using privacy-centric extension..." feels like bullshit, but from how I understand it based on the screenshot, the issue is that you have blocked the cookie permissions pop-up, whose main reason is to give you an option to opt-out of any tracking cookies, thus protecting your privacy. While also being required by law.

However, this depends on how exactly is the law formulated. How does it deals with a case where you don't accept, nor decline any cookies, and just ignore it? Are they not allowed to save any cookie until you accept it and specify what exactly can they save? Or should they not let you use the site until you accept it?

I vaguely remember that it used to be enough to just have a OK-able warning that this site is using cookies, but then it changed to include a choice to opt-out. Which could indicate that unless you opt-out, which they are required to give you a chance to, they can use whatever tracking cookies they want. And if that is the case, this message is actually correct.

[–] majora@sh.itjust.works 24 points 9 months ago

In the EU they must assume you have opted out until you explicitly opt in. blocking the popuip by law, must be treated as opting out. or to be more specific, its aconsent thing. they must assume they do not have consent until you explicitly give it.if this popup is in the EU, its a violation to my knowledge as it is forcing the user to change theirbrowsers settings or opt into something not necessary.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KarnaSubarna@lemmy.ml 12 points 9 months ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] moreeni@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

Thanks to the CNN overlords for caring about privacy. Blatant liars.

[–] BiggestBulb@kbin.run 5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Could probably try spoofing the user-agent of you really need to use their service (I mean, I wouldn't, this is wholly unethical). The Floorp browser (a fork of Firefox) comes with the ability to spoof to other browsers easily

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] OfficerBribe@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

CNN might be the only site I've seen that actually checks if you have made a cookie choice then. The whole cookie acceptance thing is dumb, but they are following the law.

Thankfully there is a plan that EU will make changes fo current policy so those popups might go away.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

The plan should be "Tracking opt-in required - no banners or notifications allowed."

[–] sjmulder@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The world turned upside dooooowwwwn 🎵

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Juvyn00b@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I'm a noob... But hear me out. Does anyone make a browser extension that fools the site into thinking you've accepted the cookie(s) when you really haven't?

[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Does cookie autodelete count?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›