Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kagus]

boop on de snootle

Wasn't it also ruled that tweets from his account constitute official white house statements though? As an official public statement from a government organization, it's not protected by the first amendment.

[Tack]

The clock struck two, and I was craving a snack. I thought for a jaunt to the Maccas and back.
But much to my sadness (with a large side of shame) I found I had only nine bucks to my name.
So I think “a menu is what I must seek”, to see which of those foodstuffs my cashflow could eke.
I download an app but am astonished to find, it wants registration and signup and data of mine.
I think to myself “this does not feel right. Perhaps I can go for a search on their site?”
So I give it a kick, and get back a snore. It seems that this website has cookies galore.
So screwed on the app, and the website’s the same.
Fuck you macdonalds, I’m not playing this game.

[overseer05-15]

Whats wrong with cookies

[wierd]

The ones for websites and all of their ilk, are not the kind eaten with a tall glass of milk.
The modern internet, once must now see, is all based on the discovery of one's private ID.
Gone are the days of yore, so remember: These are the days of Eternal September!
Want to know prices of goods and of fare? A website that's decent is special and rare!
Trackers and cookies, darknets and more-- The modern internet is all that for sure!

[KittyTac]

It's not like I really care.

[Mephisto]

[Reelya]

I think people freak out too much about cookies.

You need cookies to allow *persistence* between clicks on a site's pages. The concept of a session relies on them. This isn't some Orwellian data-collecton scheme. if they had your data, they could just transmit that to the server without using a cookie whatsoever. Cookies allow anonymous yet persistent browsing, since the user-data is stored only on your browser, and sent with each page request, so the site doesn't actually need to store anything about you. It's actually much better for privacy that this is done with client-side cookies rather than with server-side IP tracking.

I think the cookie-fear is misplaced purely because cookies are something that is visible to the user. This isn't a bad thing, you can look at cookies in plain text and see what data is in there. It's actually way less creepy than the alternative choice, where they track your session by using a database on the server-side that makes a permanent record of every user.

[wierd]

When cookies are used THAT WAY they are not a problem.

The issue, is that no site since the early 2000s hosts all its own content.  As such, there are cross-site cookies being generated (as all those facebook analytics things get called, all those google analytics things get called, etc...) and then those SERVICES cross-reference the cookies with other data they already have or have written previously.

This is how you suddenly start getting all those adverts after looking at an amazon item page.

If cookies were JUST used to keep a single persistent session, and then promptly deleted, and NOT incessantly cross-referenced, they would not be egregious in any way.  However, that is NOT how they are used in normal practice.

[Dunamisdeos]

There was a big virus cookie scare back in like 1999 or whatnot, and that just sort of never wore off.

[wierd]

Yes and no.

There is a thing called the "ever cookie"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evercookie

This uses aggressive cross-referencing and some other tricks, to create persistent files that are very difficult to remove all traces of.  Traces of evercookie can be used to recreate all the parts of ever cookie, ensuring persistent tagging of the browser/computer, and with other javascript API shennanigans, user ID of logged on windows user, etc.

Big analytics firms like Facebook and Google use methodologies similar to evercookie to ensure that they can monitor your browsing habits AFTER you navigate away, so that they can offer you "tailored services" (COUGH-- Targeted adverts- COUGH), and they share that information with government agencies (See also, "But our super shady Google China search engine would be SO AMAZINGLY USEFUL!!" from google, concerning their in-progress work on that very angle.)

So again-- if it was *JUST* used the way Reelya points out, it would be benign and good.

But its not.

[pisskop]

I would honestly be terrified to know what the federal file on me actually contains.  And trust me, there is one.



P:   Im going to do a bad thing and say that government tracking is both inevitable and not necessarily a bad thing.  This isnt going to be 'Big G.O.V. watching you for signs of dissident behavior patterns' or 'G.O.V. will enforce NewThink', or even 'track the "casual" pedophile online'.

This is 'yeah, we could do some of the crap like on NCIS to catch criminals irl, but its so costly in both monies and manhours that we don't'.  Brittish CCTV has proven the effectiveness and limitations of relatively overarching watchdogs.



I quite firmly believe that as machines begin to supplant humans as the productive factor in economies that many countries will see a rise in class disparity, unemployment, general crime and listlessness, the subsequent loss of human rights as we swing wildly towards authoritarian, and then an eventual mellowing out as we adopt more sustainable and proper socialistic constitutions.



PP:   Not to jump into the land of speculation from a convo about 90's cookies.

[wierd]

And yet, the NSA literally vacuums up data at monitoring sites like it was going out of style, warehouses it, and then does aggressive data mining of it.

And that's just the USA (and the UK)...  Then you have China, which DOES actively use technology to locate and then "deal with" dissidents, and US tech companies all too willing to get in on that action, if it means getting in on the worlds second largest economy.

Depending on the nation in question, the will and motive to do such "house keeping" is very much real.  The willingness of companies in countries where that shit is considered evil and egregious, just to increase their shareholder value every quarter, should be very alarming.

Sadly, the complacency of most people ("Oh, that's just to catch child porn dealers and such.. nothing to do with me!" & etc.) turns a blind eye to this trend, and before you know it, shit is gettin real, and people are wondering why big corporations are so eagerly being part of the new terror.

Personally, I would rather that technology created with the intent to facilitate the collaboration and distribution of information and free discussion of ideas, not be used in ways contrary to that, because some powerful people think they can either get rich, or because they get authority boners.

I would be perfectly OK with cookies, being used as reelya says they are intended to be used. (as that *IS* how they are INTENDED to be used.)  To that, I would add, that I STRONGLY desire there to be legally enforced isolation on that technology, and for cross-site analytics to be illegal.

[Eric Blank]

Our deli cooks refused to make me tacos on account of a lack of soft taco shells. Aka tortillas. I even pointed out the perfectly good tortillas right behind her. Apparently flour tortillas cant be used to make tacos. Ive been doing it wrong my entire life and i never knew.

Fucking lazy bitch probably just doesnt want to do any work, as usual. Ill just have a sad snack instead.

[pisskop]

In March of 18 a new law governing the labeling of prepared foodstuffs and its caloric contents came into effect.  Though it allows explicit provisions for 'custom ordered' foods like on-the-spot made sandwiches, and even 'seasonal' and 'sporadic' items, it has scared a lot of people into rigidity and unwillingness to go out of their way.  Or given an excuse to the already unmotivated to do the same.


A lot of places don't like training their clerks into competency as well, which adds the fuel of ignorance of the actual law to this fire.  Of course, if you are unwilling to trust them to be proficient and attentive enough to not break the law . . .

[Reelya]

If some businesses are over-reacting to the laws and not offering specific services, that's not really a problem. It's an opportunity, since it creates an unmet desire.