zlacker

>>pabs3+(OP)
I tried to read this article on digital privacy but after five minutes spent unticking boxes allowing my usage data to be sent to an augean list of data collectors I gave up and left.

>>Twey+w4
> Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

>>gruez+d8
An article being inaccessible or illegible counts as tangential?

>>nilamo+v8
Not to mention it's directly related to the subject of the article.

>>wat100+j9
That might be true but it's been done to death because it's applicable basically every time commercial coverage of a privacy-related topic. It has the vibe of "we should improve society somewhat. yet you participate in it. curious!". Not to mention in publications with proper editorial independence, the "business side" (ie. the side that's responsible for adding the ads/trackers) is firewalled from the side writing the articles, so there isn't even really a contradiction.

>>gruez+ra
It's more like, "you complain that people throw sand in your eyes, yet you also throw sand in people's eyes, curious." This is not "yet you participate in society." Unlike participating in society, these behaviors are entirely optional and they can stop any time they want, they just prefer not to. Editorial independency doesn't absolve them. It just means that they're doing the right thing in one area but not another.