this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
572 points (97.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35556 readers
817 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It's not even "Incognito" (what a misnomer too), this is a Gecko-based browser

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PumpedSardines 72 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I feel like for straw poll it's more valid, they probably do it to try and avoid people voting more than once.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SevereLow 48 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Cookies are not evil per se... but data mining companies made them like that.

I'm administrating an online store and cookies are responsible for the customer's cart, plus their user session / logged in state.

As an admin I adhere to the "golden rule", thus there are no creepy trackers on store. I don't like them and I don't want customers to face the same thing on websites that I manage.

That said, cookies are needed for user session & fraud protection. Instead of nuking cookies we shall kick the trackers out.

[–] WhoRoger 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yea but all that kind of functionality can work with (permanent) private mode as well. I don't use a lot of web services so I can log in when I need or make a pwa like with Lemmy here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] quinten 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

"One vote per IP-address" - So they already tackled the problem that people can vote more then once.

Straight-up asshole design.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's also asshole design. Most people are behind some form of nat. It's especially egregious for customers of ISPs who use CGNAT.

[–] WhoRoger 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly what I think. They also block VPNs and such.

[–] chagall 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] WhoRoger 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'll look into that. I believe web sites shouldn't have any way to detect private mode, right?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wonder if it tries to save a cookie then read it back? I don't really know how any of this works but that sounds like a way to detect it that's fairly infallible.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Writing a cookie and reading it back should work just fine even in incognito mode. It just gets deleted once incognito is closed.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WhiteTiger 43 points 1 year ago (10 children)

I mean, of all sites, polls make the most sense to require cookies to avoid duplicate votes.

[–] danprs 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Wouldn't the better solution be to keep a log of previous client IPs, on the server side? Sure, VPN will circumvent it, but it's much easier for me to clear a cookie 100 times then to connect to 100 different VPNs.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

The EU has made logging IP addresses generally illegal.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Except that it is really easy to clear cookies

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Dick_Justice 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's when I stop giving them traffic. There's far too many alternatives to do otherwise.

[–] ilickfrogs 18 points 1 year ago

Enter.

"NOPE"

clicks back

And proceed to chose next search result.

[–] Draconic_NEO 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's an extension that allows you to hide incognito mode from websites called Hide Private Mode I'm not sure why browsers don't do this by default (maybe it's some funny compliance thing) it would greatly improve privacy.

[–] WhoRoger 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Thx. It's weird, but I guess that's now part of Firefox now, to be hypocrites.

Also why the heck does the browser need to ping Google every time I launch a private session? I can't even fathom a reasonable answer.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not pointless, it's so they can track you.

what a misnomer too

It's crazy how many people think "incognito mode" prevents people from seeing what websites they are visiting.

[–] funkless 9 points 1 year ago (12 children)

yeah, it's for buying secret Christmas presents for your wife

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Izzy 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any websites that doesn't just work with a simple ad blocker or still has ads I just close and never return.

[–] Exusia 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"Oops! Looks like you're using an adblocker! Please pay a subscription!"

Oops looks like I'm gonna check the comments for someone who pasted your article for free!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nieceandtows 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It kind of makes sense for strawpoll, because without some sort of cookies, they wouldn't know if the same person is voting multiple times. But they should say something like 'incognito mode makes the votes inaccurate, please visit on normal mode'

[–] joyjoy 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

One vote per IP-Address allowed.

They already have your IP. "Incognito" mode doesn't change that.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

That does have the consequence of allowing only one person to vote per public IP, which on large networks may correspond to quite a lot of users.

That probably doesn't matter much for a simple internet straw poll, but I can imagine situations where IP-based uniqueness isn't reliable enough.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kaotic 17 points 1 year ago

I kind of understand this one though, 99% of the time stuff like this is just bullshit. But this is an effort to stop users from voting multiple times.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

When I go to a site, and they do it, I avoid it at all the costs or never come back!

[–] AlmightySnoo 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is that Firefox Focus? Because if yes, them that counts as "incognito mode" too.

[–] WhoRoger 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's IceRaven, but I have it set to permanent private mode. I dont need to deal with cookies of every shitty site.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lynny 12 points 1 year ago

Sites like this I just close the tab and use uBlacklist to hide them from any search results.

[–] possiblylinux127 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Honestly people should just set there browser to clear cookies on close

[–] LufyCZ 14 points 1 year ago

Can't say I like logging into all of my accounts (most of which gave 2FA as well) 3 times a day

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I see that i directly close the thing

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

For such things, I have a script that creates a brand new temporary Firefox profile and deletes it immediately after closing the browser.

[–] dangblingus 5 points 1 year ago (8 children)

When is the world going to admit that by and large, internet advertising is garbage and doesn't work? People are far more likely to buy whatever random crap sponsor is on their fav youtuber's videos than anything from "targeted advertising".

[–] TechnoBabble 8 points 1 year ago

Companies have the data for how much Internet advertising works.

That's why they keep buying ads.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Does it not work though?

It's hard to imagine that companies are just happily pissing away money on advertising for absolutely no reason. I agree that standard banner ads you see in articles seems pretty useless, but I can imagine other formats being more effective. Youtube ads, either as part of the content or interrupting it, seem decently effective, given that they're essentially the equivalent of TV ads. Speaking personally, I actually went to a cabaret-style show recently that I learned about through an Instagram ad, and had a really great time there. The performer asked how people had heard about it, and quite a lot were through Instagram.

And suffice it to say that, given that the title of this show is "Spooky and Gay", that ad was very much targeted lol, and effectively. I honestly can't say I'm that upset about it. I don't think it's so much the very concept of targeted advertising that I dislike so much as just the fact that it's so often done very poorly.

[–] c0mbatbag3l 5 points 1 year ago

If it didn't work, do you really think "profit at all costs" businesses would be spending millions of dollars to do it?

[–] jcg 4 points 1 year ago

It works often enough, and that amount is enough for Google and Facebook to become two of the largest companies in the world. If it didn't, people probably wouldn't have kept doing it this long. It may not work on you, but in that case you probably aren't representative of the general population.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›