Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Flickr broken

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Paul Carmichael

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 5:57:11 AM3/6/21
to
Hello. folks.

It seems Flickr is trying to abide by some cookie legislation and if you try to view it,
up pops a massive set of cookie options. Except there is no "accept and continue" option.
Or sometimes there is. On Android, there isn't. I just sent a flickr link to a few people
and none of them can view the photos because of this. Maybe it's only in Europe? On my
wife's iphone, I re-loaded it 3 or 4 times and eventually it worked.

Anybody know if it's going to be fixed?

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/elpatio

Alfred Molon

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 6:22:33 AM3/6/21
to
In article <iah5g2...@mid.individual.net>, Paul Carmichael
says...
No problem accessing Flickr here in Germany, using a Firefox
browser.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

Paul Carmichael

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 7:09:37 AM3/6/21
to
El 6/3/21 a las 12:22, Alfred Molon escribió:
> In article <iah5g2...@mid.individual.net>, Paul Carmichael
> says...
>>
>> Hello. folks.
>>
>> It seems Flickr is trying to abide by some cookie legislation and if you try to view it,
>> up pops a massive set of cookie options. Except there is no "accept and continue" option.
>> Or sometimes there is. On Android, there isn't. I just sent a flickr link to a few people
>> and none of them can view the photos because of this. Maybe it's only in Europe? On my
>> wife's iphone, I re-loaded it 3 or 4 times and eventually it worked.
>>
>> Anybody know if it's going to be fixed?
>
> No problem accessing Flickr here in Germany, using a Firefox
> browser.
>

It didn't ask you to agree to cookies from all its associates?

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/elpatio

Bill W

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 9:51:38 AM3/6/21
to
On Mar 6, 2021, Paul Carmichael wrote
(in article <iah5g2...@mid.individual.net>):
No problem here (US).

Whisky-dave

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 10:40:32 AM3/6/21
to
Seems OK here in London, but my cookies might already be enabled, the problem I had was that there are 8 Paul Carmichael on flikr when I typed in your name to find you.



>
> https://paulc.es/elpatio

Paul Carmichael

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 12:55:51 PM3/6/21
to
El 6/3/21 a las 16:40, Whisky-dave escribió:
> On Saturday, 6 March 2021 at 10:57:11 UTC, Paul Carmichael wrote:
>> Hello. folks.
>>
>> It seems Flickr is trying to abide by some cookie legislation and if you try to view it,
>> up pops a massive set of cookie options. Except there is no "accept and continue" option.
>> Or sometimes there is. On Android, there isn't. I just sent a flickr link to a few people
>> and none of them can view the photos because of this. Maybe it's only in Europe? On my
>> wife's iphone, I re-loaded it 3 or 4 times and eventually it worked.
>>
>> Anybody know if it's going to be fixed?

>
> Seems OK here in London, but my cookies might already be enabled, the problem I had was that there are 8 Paul Carmichael on flikr when I typed in your name to find you.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/wibbleypants/albums/72157718533003878

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/elpatio

Alfred Molon

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 3:44:36 PM3/6/21
to
In article <iah9nq...@mid.individual.net>, Paul Carmichael
says...
> It didn't ask you to agree to cookies from all its associates?

Hmmm... thinking again about it, I installed some time ago the
"I don't care about cookies" plugin for Firefox. Perhaps that
took care of the cookies request. In any case, I didn't see it.

Cookies are not an issue, because I've also installed a "Cookie
AutoDelete" plugin, which deletes all cookies when I close the
tabs of a website. Even if a website installs 10000 cookies, all
are deleted when I leave that website.

Neil

unread,
Mar 6, 2021, 4:14:28 PM3/6/21
to
On 3/6/2021 3:44 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <iah9nq...@mid.individual.net>, Paul Carmichael
> says...
>> It didn't ask you to agree to cookies from all its associates?
>
> Hmmm... thinking again about it, I installed some time ago the
> "I don't care about cookies" plugin for Firefox. Perhaps that
> took care of the cookies request. In any case, I didn't see it.
>
> Cookies are not an issue, because I've also installed a "Cookie
> AutoDelete" plugin, which deletes all cookies when I close the
> tabs of a website. Even if a website installs 10000 cookies, all
> are deleted when I leave that website.
>
"Cookies" aren't what they used to be, e.g. information uniquely
relevant to the site you're visiting. Some browsers allow you to block
all cookies and therefore none will be saved to your computer anyway.

Today's "cookies" contain your machine info in standard formats that are
sold to services that can compare it with other activities associated
with your computer. So, "accept cookies" with miscellaneous options meet
legal requirements to notify you that you're being tracked. Even if you
are blocking all cookies, what you click on doesn't matter, you will be
tracked. That's one reason that you can continue to use a site with its
"cookies" being blocked.

Ways to disguise your machine information are sometimes available within
the browsers' privacy settings and/or with add-ons.

--
best regards,

Neil

Alfred Molon

unread,
Mar 7, 2021, 12:51:22 PM3/7/21
to
In article <s20rbe$nnt$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil says...
> "Cookies" aren't what they used to be, e.g. information uniquely
> relevant to the site you're visiting. Some browsers allow you to block
> all cookies and therefore none will be saved to your computer anyway.
>
> Today's "cookies" contain your machine info in standard formats that are
> sold to services that can compare it with other activities associated
> with your computer. So, "accept cookies" with miscellaneous options meet
> legal requirements to notify you that you're being tracked. Even if you
> are blocking all cookies, what you click on doesn't matter, you will be
> tracked. That's one reason that you can continue to use a site with its
> "cookies" being blocked.
>
> Ways to disguise your machine information are sometimes available within
> the browsers' privacy settings and/or with add-ons.

But if the cookies have been deleted, how would they track you?

nospam

unread,
Mar 7, 2021, 2:20:08 PM3/7/21
to
In article <MPG.3aaf30f8f...@eunews.blocknews.net>, Alfred
Molon <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> But if the cookies have been deleted, how would they track you?

many, many ways.

start with browser fingerprinting.

cookies are old school.

Neil

unread,
Mar 8, 2021, 1:59:14 PM3/8/21
to
On 3/7/2021 12:51 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <s20rbe$nnt$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil says...
>> "Cookies" aren't what they used to be, e.g. information uniquely
>> relevant to the site you're visiting. Some browsers allow you to block
>> all cookies and therefore none will be saved to your computer anyway.
>>
>> Today's "cookies" contain your machine info in standard formats that are
>> sold to services that can compare it with other activities associated
>> with your computer. So, "accept cookies" with miscellaneous options meet
>> legal requirements to notify you that you're being tracked. Even if you
>> are blocking all cookies, what you click on doesn't matter, you will be
>> tracked. That's one reason that you can continue to use a site with its
>> "cookies" being blocked.
>>
>> Ways to disguise your machine information are sometimes available within
>> the browsers' privacy settings and/or with add-ons.
>
> But if the cookies have been deleted, how would they track you?
>

As I pointed out, above, the information being collected when you visit
a site aren't "cookies" in the original sense. There is no need to save
anything to your computer to collect your machine information and track
you, therefore there are no "cookies" to delete.

--
best regards,

Neil

Alfred Molon

unread,
Mar 8, 2021, 7:02:12 PM3/8/21
to
In article <s25s5t$os4$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil says...
> As I pointed out, above, the information being collected when you visit
> a site aren't "cookies" in the original sense. There is no need to save
> anything to your computer to collect your machine information and track
> you, therefore there are no "cookies" to delete.

Is there a plugin for Firefox which blocks this tracking or
(sort of) anonymises your PC?

nospam

unread,
Mar 8, 2021, 7:37:47 PM3/8/21
to
In article <MPG.3ab0d9689...@eunews.blocknews.net>, Alfred
Molon <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Is there a plugin for Firefox which blocks this tracking or
> (sort of) anonymises your PC?

no. plugin developers will always be one step behind tracking
technology.

Neil

unread,
Mar 9, 2021, 11:44:29 AM3/9/21
to
On 3/8/2021 7:02 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <s25s5t$os4$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil says...
>> As I pointed out, above, the information being collected when you visit
>> a site aren't "cookies" in the original sense. There is no need to save
>> anything to your computer to collect your machine information and track
>> you, therefore there are no "cookies" to delete.
>
> Is there a plugin for Firefox which blocks this tracking or
> (sort of) anonymises your PC?
>
There are some levels of protection in FF, but there's no easy solution
to the problem. You might want to look in Options > Privacy & Security
to see what you've already addressed. But, even then you're only
addressing small parts of the issue.

My suggestion is that if you aren't doing anything nefarious on the
internet and only want to thumb your nose at those tracking you, forget
it. Otherwise, you'll need to become quite fluent in dark web techniques
and forget commercial browsers, etc.

--
best regards,

Neil

nospam

unread,
Mar 9, 2021, 12:12:13 PM3/9/21
to
In article <s288l8$vmo$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com>
wrote:

> My suggestion is that if you aren't doing anything nefarious on the
> internet and only want to thumb your nose at those tracking you, forget
> it. Otherwise, you'll need to become quite fluent in dark web techniques
> and forget commercial browsers, etc.

this is totally false.

there is *no* need to have any knowledge of 'dark web techniques', let
alone become quite fluent, as it's completely irrelevant, nor is there
any need to avoid commercial browsers.

some browsers, the very ones you say to forget, include anti-tracking
features, such as spoofing browser fingerprinting, cookie jars and ad
blocking.

there are browser extensions that will greatly limit tracking, which
require knowing how to install one and maybe tweaking its settings.

with slightly more effort, a *significant* reduction in tracking can be
obtained with upstream content blockers or more aggressive local ones,
which will work for more than just browsers.

however, it will never be 100%, nor does it need to be.

Neil

unread,
Mar 9, 2021, 1:07:37 PM3/9/21
to
On 3/9/2021 12:12 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <s288l8$vmo$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My suggestion is that if you aren't doing anything nefarious on the
>> internet and only want to thumb your nose at those tracking you, forget
>> it. Otherwise, you'll need to become quite fluent in dark web techniques
>> and forget commercial browsers, etc.
>
> this is totally false.
>
> there is *no* need to have any knowledge of 'dark web techniques', let
> alone become quite fluent, as it's completely irrelevant, nor is there
> any need to avoid commercial browsers.
>
> some browsers, the very ones you say to forget, include anti-tracking
> features, such as spoofing browser fingerprinting, cookie jars and ad
> blocking.
>
Certainly you realize that the paragraph you chose to delete from my
comments says exactly the same thing?

> there are browser extensions that will greatly limit tracking, which
> require knowing how to install one and maybe tweaking its settings.
>
> with slightly more effort, a *significant* reduction in tracking can be
> obtained with upstream content blockers or more aggressive local ones,
> which will work for more than just browsers.
>
> however, it will never be 100%, nor does it need to be.
>
Certainly you realize that your last sentence above contradicts your
objections?

--
best regards,

Neil

nospam

unread,
Mar 9, 2021, 1:43:06 PM3/9/21
to
In article <s28dh4$kcv$1...@dont-email.me>, Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com>
wrote:

> >> My suggestion is that if you aren't doing anything nefarious on the
> >> internet and only want to thumb your nose at those tracking you, forget
> >> it. Otherwise, you'll need to become quite fluent in dark web techniques
> >> and forget commercial browsers, etc.
> >
> > this is totally false.
> >
> > there is *no* need to have any knowledge of 'dark web techniques', let
> > alone become quite fluent, as it's completely irrelevant, nor is there
> > any need to avoid commercial browsers.
> >
> > some browsers, the very ones you say to forget, include anti-tracking
> > features, such as spoofing browser fingerprinting, cookie jars and ad
> > blocking.
> >
> Certainly you realize that the paragraph you chose to delete from my
> comments says exactly the same thing?

it doesn't.

your paragraph was:
> There are some levels of protection in FF, but there's no easy solution
> to the problem. You might want to look in Options > Privacy & Security
> to see what you've already addressed. But, even then you're only
> addressing small parts of the issue.

the only thing correct about that is that what's in firefox addresses
small parts of the issue.

your claim that there's no easy solution is wrong.

> > there are browser extensions that will greatly limit tracking, which
> > require knowing how to install one and maybe tweaking its settings.
> >
> > with slightly more effort, a *significant* reduction in tracking can be
> > obtained with upstream content blockers or more aggressive local ones,
> > which will work for more than just browsers.
> >
> > however, it will never be 100%, nor does it need to be.
> >
> Certainly you realize that your last sentence above contradicts your
> objections?

it doesn't.
0 new messages