this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
2297 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

59769 readers
3084 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago (21 children)

So is this basically saying youtube isn't allowed to detect an adblocker?

I'm not sure I really follow why that specifically is something they're policing.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

As I understand it, detecting an adblocker is a form of fingerprinting. Fingerprinting like this is a privacy violation unless there is first a consent process.

The outcome of this will be that consent for the detecting will be added to the TOS or as a modal and failing to consent will give up access to the service. It won't change Youtube's behavior, I don't think. But it could result in users being able to opt out of the anti-adblock... just that it also might be opting out of all of YouTube when they do it.

[–] ensignrick@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I'm all for this protection but for the sake of argument isn't use of the service consent to begin with? Or is that the American argument around these types of regulation?

I'm a pihole, vpn, adblock and invidious user ftr.. 😂

[–] TheGreatFox@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

That's how the corporate-written laws in the USA handle it most likely. The EU actually has some amount of consumer protection. Burying it in a 100 page terms of service document doesn't count as consent either.

[–] 0xD@infosec.pub 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It depends on the context, but generally you require explicit permission for data-related stuff which means something like a checkbox or a signature.

[–] online@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

It's "consent" from the POV of the law and the corporation, but I say fuck 'em. Do you really consent to everything? Did you read their ToS and Privacy Policy every time it's amended? In the plain everyday use of the word "consent" I mean. Not in the legal constructions we've created.

Thus, since I do not consent to everything in any ToS or Privacy Policy, I use adversarial tech. My use of adversarial tech is how I enforce my lack of consent to everything these platforms expect from me.

If they don't want us to use adversarial tech anymore, they can change their platforms so it's no longer necessary.

load more comments (16 replies)