undefined | Better HN

0 pointsclose042y ago0 comments

The paywall is the author's choice and anyone is free to reject creating a Medium account, no damage done on either side. OP's second objection on the other hand looks less "rejectable" than a paywall because the damage is done before you have the chance to reject it:

> By using Medium, you agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Medium's implicit assumption that by clicking on their link the user accepted the policies is illegal under GDPR. It doesn't give the chance to reject before being tracked.

0 comments

4 comments · 1 top-level

sodapopcan2y ago· 3 in thread

OP made a plea, not a demand:

> Please don't use Medium, post to Medium, or share Medium links.

There was no implication people don't have a choice to keep using terrible software.

close04OP2y ago

You misunderstood me, it wasn't OP's implication, it's Medium's. Medium implies that by clicking on their link I agreed with their ToS/cookies (so tracking). This is not just a wrong implication, it's an illegal one.

The person I was replying to above only referred to the paywall issue when I think the main basis for the initial plea to avoid Medium was the second point, Medium's objectionable or illegal practices (not just "terrible") against its users. It's sensible to plea not using it or at least not promoting it here.

jjeaff2y ago

Illegal where? In the EU? I don't think it is illegal in the US at least.

sodapopcan2y ago

Ah gotcha, my mistake.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse