this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
554 points (97.4% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35287 readers
24 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/ExplicitContent


-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.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 days ago

Oh no. It's not like that. They don't even ask you about cookies any more.

This is a payment so they don't sell all your cookie data to their 1354 trusted data partners/advertising vultures.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago

I find it amusing that they "use cookies to give you the best possible experience", but then ask you to pay to not have them.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

LibreWolf (which doesn't store any cookies or other website data by default, unless you allow it) + I still don't care about cookies or Consent-O-Matic

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Hm... Was gonna try Arkenfox one of these days tbh.

[–] blarth 4 points 6 days ago

What new level of hell is this?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

the Sun would personally sell your organs if it could

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

Well, you are subscribing to the Sun.

Its your own shitshow.

No one fucking cares.

[–] [email protected] 188 points 1 week ago (4 children)

OP, The Sun is one of the trashiest rags on the face of this Earth. Your best option regardless of their ad practices was always to stay well away from them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

They have a reputation in the UK for a reason, I don't even want to start thinking what the us version is like

[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh I know, I clicked a link here on lemmy and was taken to that site. I never read it otherwise, but now Im definitely not reading it...

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

you can block websites if you want if you’re on voyager. It’ll filter out posts which link to whatever websites you list.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago

Radical approach, because I might miss the post with interesting comments, and people often provide alternative links or straight up embed summaries.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 week ago (5 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] 5 points 6 days ago

Unfortunately, at least in Germany it's legal. There was a special ruling recently.

(Link in German)

https://www.datenschutzkonferenz-online.de/media/pm/DSK_Beschluss_Bewertung_von_Pur-Abo-Modellen_auf_Websites.pdf

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This appears to be a US specific website, where they could get away with the geoblocking technique to bypass gdpr

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It's The Sun. A British newspaper.

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

It for sure is The Sun, but if you look closely at the logo, you will see it actually says "The U.S. Sun". So it's an American offshoot of the British newspaper and the domain OP was accessing is likely hosted in the U.S.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

I'm in the UK, the British version does this as well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Sadly it is not, as you need to pay to access content by money or pay by viewing ads.

Facebook uses the same model.

If you don't want the "premium content" by paying with way 1 or way 2, you can't use the site.

This will end up being a final nail in the coffin for these sites, I wish.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week 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 1 week ago

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

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The best part of this is you would need to give them your personal information to pay them, and you'd need to accept the necessary cookies for them to know you've paid when you access the website. 🤣🤣🤣

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

you'd need to accept the necessary cookies for them to know you've paid when you access the website

Cookies that are required for and only used for operational purposes (like knowing if the user is logged in) don't require consent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Yeah fair enough, I was just highlighting the irony.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago

Not any factor lotion will protect your mental health from "the Sun" o_O

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago

No you don't.

The site is trash so you leave.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (3 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!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

you get ads whether pay or not. keep your money

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

The red flag there in the screenshot shows you the name of the publication you should avoid using or visiting.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (3 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] 1 points 6 days ago

Only thing the papers were good for was paper mache

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why are you trying to read the Sun? Brain cancer is a terrible disease. Don't do this to your family.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dsilverz 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A naive question of mine, but isn't using a browser/extensions that silently/transparently blocks cookies (such as Brave, but not just it) enough to fearlessly click "Accept All Cookies", since ultimately they would be pointless for the purpose of tracking (due to the browser's own cookie blocking capabilities)?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Yeah it would. But as I said elsewhere, this is probably enough to be 'too much effort' for the majority of users, and definitely a lot more effort than it should be. I already know several people who habitually click accept all on cookie banners, and I know I have caught myself doing that a couple times too...

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It asks to play DRM content but plays videos anyway.

Their devs must be so sick of their business dept.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago

I'd be surprised if it was just the business department...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

How is this even legal?

Because Brits voted Brrrrexit?

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