this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024

557 points (97.6% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

38818 readers

405 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.

Rules:

1. Be Respectful

Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...

2. No Illegal Content

Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...

3. No Spam

Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...

4. No Porn/Explicit

Content

-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...

5. No Enciting Harassment,

Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts

-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...

6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

7. Content should match the theme of this community.

-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.

...

8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.

-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense

Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

557

So now I have to PAY you to NOT store files on my device that I don't want? (lemmy.world)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

122 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Was trying to read a news story and... What fresh shitfuckery is this? Why do I now have to pay money to a company just for the privilege of not being spied upon and not getting your cookies that I don't want or need? How is this even legal?

RE: "Why are you even reading that shitrag?" -- I clicked on a link someone posted in another sublemmit, didn't realise it was the Sun till after. I do not read the Sun on the regular, chill. My point stands regardless that this is extremely shitty and should probably not be allowed.

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I don't think I've ever had 63 tabs open on my browser. Well done.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Really? I regularly have well over 100, constant ♾️ Don't get me wrong, I wish I didn't.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

"To change all cookie settings click_here" <-- this is the bit you want. It's free to reject all the cookies yourself.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Visiting the Murdoch-owned Sun was your first mistake. Everything they do to you after that is your own fault.,

Might as well hand your credit card to the MyPillow Guy next and complain about how much money just got charged to your account from the nearest strip club.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Solution: don't read that shitrag. It was always a waste of paper, now it is a waste of bandwidth as well.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not the f'n point

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

But a fair point nonetheless.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

How is this even legal?

Because Brits voted Brrrrexit?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We still have the UK implementation of GDPR. That didn’t go away when we left the EU.

We won’t have any changes to it that might have happened since brexit but we didn’t remove the law either.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah I learned of this before, you are 100% correct. The EU GDPR is in place for any UK company doing business in the EU and the UK GDPR visa versa, but they differ on topics as immigration, national security and such as you might know anyhow. The rest is very similar.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

This is a US website no?

Image of The Sun U.S logo

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How is that not extortion?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Because you aren't compelled to use their site.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

True, but shouldn't I be able to use it if I want to without having to choose between paying money or being spied on?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The only other option I can see would be ads -- but I'm betting you'd just use an ad-blocker.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, the fact that when there are ads, there's always like 20 of them is another issue... But yeah, I don't even care about ads but as I see it I should have a right to privacy without having to pay for it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (4 children)

You don't have to pay for privacy. You still have that right.

What you don't have is the right to use that particular website without either paying for it, or allowing cookies.

You aren't a victim of anything here.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

It's the Sun. No one should use their site. They're doing you a favour by showing you they're assholes the second you land on their site.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 5 months ago (8 children)

I'm pretty sure this is illegal under GDPR. They're just seeing how long they can get away with it for, before they have to apologise and get no punishment.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Indeed. There must be no downside to clicking no. Consent must be freely given.

Although I'd argue almost nobody complies with the spirit of the law. Popping up a consent form every time you visit unless you accidentally click accept and then never asking you again doesn't feel like consent was truly given.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, to be fair, "Why can't websites just remember that I said no to cookies?"

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm seeing this kind of thing on an ever increasing number of sites in Germany. It's especially galling on sites I already pay a subscription fee for! Isn't that enough? Now I'm supposed to pay another monthly subscription to avoid tracking cookies?

I've already cancelled one news website due to this, letting them know why (they're small enough that I know they read it, since it was part of a conversation). Fat lot of good it'll do, but ....

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

I wouldn't call what they're asking for a subscription – it's ransom.

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I am really fucking sick and tired of every goddamn company thinking they're entitled to colonize my property and hack it to serve them instead of me.

My computer is my property, you fascist fucks, not yours, and my actual property rights trump your Imaginary "Property" "rights" (i.e. temporary government-granted privileges) every single time and in every single circumstance!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah exactly!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I broadly agree with your sentiment, in particular computing equipment that I purchase and ongoing trends in tech (like smart TVs) that are abusive to consumers.

However, I find this argument not terribly persuasive in this particular case. The content of a website isn't an extension of your property. It is not even public property. Visiting a site is voluntary. You clearly didn't pay for accessing the site, nor was it subsidized through a social program. So exactly how should content (regardless of how trashy it is) be funded? Statements like "rights" (i.e. temporary government-granted privileges) suggest you are espousing libertarian views, but at the same time, you are not expressing willingness to pay for a service privately?

I dunno, it just comes across as demanding a handout. Meanwhile, not visiting websites that don't meet your vision for how funding content should be done seems like a perfectly simple and reasonable approach to have for this problem.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

The content of a website isn't an extension of your property.

No, but it is my property which is to be used to store files that this company has put there, just so they can track me across the web to sell me more crappy shit I do not need.

So exactly how should content (regardless of how trashy it is) be funded?

With ads, but either be good and use ads that arent spyware, or let me choose to opt out of the tracky ones and use general ads instead.

Meanwhile, not visiting websites that don't meet your vision for how funding content should be done seems like a perfectly simple and reasonable approach to have for this problem.

Yup, hence why I noped outta there as soon as I saw that popup cause fuuuck that...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Jokes on you, to remember your choice for no coockies they have to use a cookie.

Ublock origins -> select element -> remove

Or auto accept/refuse cookies with extension, then auto delete cookies for all but approved sites when closing browser.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I still don't care about Cookies + Cooking Auto-Delete is what I do. Do whatever the fuck is needed to get rid of the cookie banner and then delete all cookies when closing the tab.

I don't even whitelist websites, I just don't need cookies

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is a password manager, maybe with automatic login or at least autofill, part of your stack?

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I mean, I'm not opposed to all cookies. Ones that I actually need like that one are fine. Just dont track me kthxbye...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Bild is doing this shit too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

In Europe? I would think there would be some European counsel to protest that...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah... That's what I fear is that once one has started doing it, others will follow.

load more comments