Louis Ingenthron @LouisIngenthron@social.cleverlibre.org

@ahltorp Every effective ad system uses personalized recommendations, which require some kind of persistence, like cookies.

Also, that personal data does belong to them. The user gave it to them in lieu of payment for their content.

(FWIW, I use script- and ad-blockers myself, but I also just make it a point not to patronize sites that have predatory or invasive monetization)

@ahltorp That's only true if by "function" you mean "allow the theft of content".
No for-profit company offers content for free. If you're paying for it with cash, then you're logged in and you need cookies. If you're not paying cash, then you have to pay for it another way, even if that's just by allowing your browser to display ads, which, also, often require cookies.

@ahltorp At least you have a choice on non-iOS platforms 🤷‍♂️ I'm on Firefox for Windows, so I'm not using either of those options.

@ahltorp Yes, exactly. And if cookies are necessary to the function of the website, then you end up with messages like the OP posted.

@barubary Which definition of "content" are you using to arrive at that conclusion?

@gazorg
You sure about that? I don't think they're allowed to, for example, deliver cookies without having gotten consent to use cookies.

Also, requiring consent as a condition of entry in no way contradicts the freedom for people to give consent freely.

@barubary It's technically the EPD, but most people seem to treat that as part of GDPR.

And, no, it's not illegal to block them, but it is theoretically illegal to deliver content to someone who has blocked them (and therefore not given explicit consent).

@waldoj Ah, right, my bad. This is because you blocked their cookie popup from showing up, and that would be illegal under GDPR, but they must not be locking the message regionally.

@oligneisti My bad. Since the OP referenced Safari, I thought you were using Firefox on iOS, which is basically Safari.

@ryebreadnyc @Famoso @jeffjarvis To an extent, sure. But then you have things like flamethrowers, which are totally unregulated, that throw that theory to the wolves.

@NPR Based on this headline, he must be running against someone young and vital in their 30s or 40s, right?

@evanwolf @carnage4life I imagine they struggle enough to negotiate for fair royalties. Those other luxuries would require leverage they don't have.

@Famoso @jeffjarvis Product safety and consumer protection are about preventing undue harm to the consumer from the product. They're not about preventing the consumer from intentionally causing harm with the product.

If they were, then kitchen knives would be illegal.

@tristansnell As I understand it, they had a tiny bit of lead in a tiny metal plug on the bottom that sealed the vacuum insulation of the cup, and is nowhere near any drinking surface.

That's not a big deal.

@carnage4life 1% of 1% of 1% of that would allow me to fund nearly every project I've ever had to abandon for lack of funding.

Just incomprehensible.