Pay us, or let us sell your info to 1200 partners
Pay us, or let us sell your info to 1200 partners
At this point its getting ridiculous.
Their point 2 even states that even if you do pay them, they will still use cookies to track you and show personalised content
It’s the fucking Daily Mail, and should be completely avoided anyway.
93Yeah, but sometimes you want to debunk it, or use it as a starting point for other research.
-3Not worth giving them the traffic.
12
Moral of the story: don't read the Daily Heil. On top of mining your data like there's no tomorrow, it's a racist, homophobic, transphobic, fascist, pseudoscientific crock of absolute shit.
53I 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
24It's infuriating, isn't it.
7
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.
49They didn't even bother to write that lol.
19
And nothing of value was lost that day (why would you even want to read that rag?)
Though I agree in principle, fuck these scummy practices.
29Isn't it illegal under GDPR? It seems to be the exact same thing Facebook tried to do.
27I 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.
17Saw a German IT magazine that does the same shit report about a judge ruling that as being illegal a little while ago.
8Yeah, 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.
3
The Mail has less utility than toilet paper.
22Don't read this disgusting Murdoch rag. The Daily Heil should honestly just skip the cookies and data farming and simply shoot all of its readers.
19I don’t think it’s earned by Murdoch, but otherwise agree with the sentiment.
4
Paid cookies opt out should be illegal
15It probably is illegal in the EU, but I have no idea whether it would be illegal in the UK, too.
17As 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.
12To 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).
6True that would make sense
1
Its not even an option. They will still use cookies even if you pay. They'd just use it for their own use
4ohh
1
Fuck the Daily Mail.
9Browser reader's mode and Archive Today: hold our beers.
8Purchase a subscription to not get personalised ads? So even when you pay, you still get ads, they are just not personalised.
5Its the same thing Facebook came up with
1
How do you know they don't just sell your data anyways?
4If 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.
3
or use firefox with ublock origin.
ublock origin blocks most of these trackers.
1