←back to thread

604 points wyldfire | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
dleslie ◴[] No.26344736[source]
This captures my feelings on the issue:

> That framing is based on a false premise that we have to choose between “old tracking” and “new tracking.” It’s not either-or. Instead of re-inventing the tracking wheel, we should imagine a better world without the myriad problems of targeted ads.

I don't want to be tracked. I never have wanted to be tracked. I shouldn't have to aggressively opt-out of tracking; it should be a service one must opt-in to receive. And it's not something we can trust industry to correct properly. This is precisely the role that privacy-protecting legislation should be undertaking.

Stop spying on us, please.

replies(10): >>26345317 #>>26345398 #>>26345438 #>>26345507 #>>26345714 #>>26346976 #>>26347529 #>>26347549 #>>26349806 #>>26350238 #
sofixa ◴[] No.26345398[source]
Do you use Web Monetisation ( as in, pay)? If you don't, and don't want to be tracked for ads, how do you propose things work?
replies(7): >>26345418 #>>26345534 #>>26345567 #>>26345584 #>>26346090 #>>26346865 #>>26348773 #
shawkinaw ◴[] No.26345534[source]
You can have ads without tracking. Print, radio, TV all do this.
replies(1): >>26345622 #
sofixa ◴[] No.26345622[source]
You can, but do you remember the times on the Internet when that was the case? I vaguely remember cents per thousands of ad clicks, which would make most websites financially unviable.
replies(2): >>26345878 #>>26346908 #
1. hobs ◴[] No.26345878[source]
And you can justify all sorts of economic activity based on deeply unethical behavior, but should you?