WE VALUE YOUR PRIVACY!
- Thread starter LCG-xyz
- Start date
Man of Honour
Probably one of those options you reject includes a preferences cookie
No, my point is that when I click 'other' (or similar) the options I put in previously are still there. It's just their way of trying to make you get bored with it and click Accept All rather than going through the process again.
Last edited:
Soldato
How do you actually use the internet though? My password manager for work alone has 50+ entries. There's likely another 20-30 services I use for personal stuff that I wouldn't want to log into every time. And even if I did where would I keep all the passwords?
Yes you will be asked every time. But at least you aren't being tracked.
For many websites you have to individually reject every cookie which I've seen go into the dozens. Forget that.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,707
That's what you think.
Breaking GDPR if they are through other means. I can't do anything about them breaking the law.
Man of Honour
And how do you achieve these things?
What Browser do you use?
What settings have you altered in that browser?
What VPN do you use?
Go on then, share the details of your strategy, help people stay safe and protect their privacy
Pale Moon browser
Self Destructing Cookies plugin
NoScript plugin
Can't remember the settings I altered - it was years ago.
NordVPN.
Sure, it has inconveniences. Especially using NoScript. But I'm used to them.
And bugger, I've just realised that my browser is not sandboxed and I thought it was. Something to put on the "to do" list.
Pale Moon has issues of its own from a privacy and security point of view, just different ones to mainstream browsers.
On a piece of paper taped to the underside of your desk, of course!
Actually, that's probably better security than it sounds in most cases. Most of the time, the person using your accounts doesn't have physical access to your desk.My job is being a flunkey, so I don't need any passwords for work. For life, I have about 20 passwords that I keep in my head. Which is far from ideal because it means that the passwords are grouped into only a handful of common themes so I can remember them. I intend to switch to using a password manager, but haven't got around to it. I would still have to log in every time, keeping the password manager app open and copy&pasting passwords from it as required.
Yep (OP here) I haven't gone as far as getting a VPN but I have a general use browser (FF, UD, Privacy badger, rejecting cookies etc) I also use EPIC browser which is more of a sandbox for sites that necessitate cookies.
It's just that message that annoys me, you clearly don't value my privacy or you wouldn't, by law, have to display that message.
"WE WANT TO TRACK YOU BUT WE NOW HAVE TO TELL YOU" would be a more honest message.
It's just that message that annoys me, you clearly don't value my privacy or you wouldn't, by law, have to display that message.
"WE WANT TO TRACK YOU BUT WE NOW HAVE TO TELL YOU" would be a more honest message.
Soldato
I couldn't care less, I'm not some weird paranoid type who thinks they're specifically harvesting all my data to track what I've been up to at an individual basis: it's just going to get lumped together with data of all the other users and averaged out. If I were someone in the public eye or it was the Government requesting this data then yeah I'd care a bit more but we're nobody's.
I use the I don't care about cookies extension which deals with most of the cookie dialogs on most sites. I think it just accepts the warning for you. Problem solved.
I use the I don't care about cookies extension which deals with most of the cookie dialogs on most sites. I think it just accepts the warning for you. Problem solved.
Thanks for this.
Man of Honour
Of course what you're doing on an individual level is tracked. That's more valuable data because it's more targetted. Averaged out data is used as well, but not exclusively.
Even if it isn't originally intended to be used on an individual basis, the data is harvested on an individual basis. Data claimed to be anonymised usually isn't really. The easiest way to evade that restriction is to use seperate data sets, each one anonymous in isolation but not when combined. Imagine a scenario in which X, Y and Z are required for identification. Dataset 1 is anonymous because it only contains X and Y. Dataset 2 is anonymous because it only contains Y and Z. Combine the two and you have X, Y and Z and anonymity disappears.
That sort of thing is extremely common even when not done deliberately to evade restrictions, even when the supposed anonymisation is done in good faith. The more data is held about a person, the less anonymous the data is.
Soldato
Indeed!
Soldato
Yeah, I do very much understand your point.
I think there's just sense and reason to it. If I wanted to buy 10KG of cocaine online (I don't
) I'm going to do everything I can to cover my tracks and be as anonymous as possible, but I don't really care Facebook happen to know I open BBC news 10 times a day.I think if we had say a Chinese points based system (see this nice infographic) where literally everything you do is tracked and reviewed I would be more paranoid about it.
I think my rationale is I don't really care if it's being done automatically by bots - like how Gmail scans all of my emails to try and offer me targets ads (which uBlock blocks anyway) - but I would find it creepy if there was someone who sat there and waded through all my data each month then gave me a call to talk about it - that's very 1984. Which I have no doubt is where our Government would like to take us eventually.
I think I'm just too boring so my data is really not of that much interest
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,707
A chess board where you think it's game over, checkmate when infact there's another 500 moves before the game finishes.
It's not really chess. Once you figure out how the algorithm works it's more like hitting the shapes in the correct hole