Comment on Designed by men, for men: Why sex with robots does not have appeal among women
hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 days agoAsshole design is asshole design. They’re essentially saying here that they’ll sell your data whatever you choose, opting out is not an option.
Obviously there’s easy ways to bypass this but it’s not an excuse for them
fl42v@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
To me it looks more like they’re saying they’ll monetize their work no matter what, tho. One way is through direct payments by those who consider their articles worth paying for, then they don’t need to sell userdata or show ads; the other way is selling userdata. Well, there’s also non-targeted advertising, but mb it doesn’t worth as much or something (and targeted ads already pay close to nothing from a single viewer, afaik).
Where I personally draw the line is when such subscriptions still include ads (looking at you, “ad-free” disney+) or have unnecessarily large costs and so on. I mean, if they charge close to what they’re making with ads and selling data, we could get most websites ~tracker-free for probably a couple of bucks a month each. This, in turn, lessens the power of ad network owners, which again makes the web better. Although, mb I’m idealizing too much, idk.