this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2025
213 points (98.2% liked)

AssholeDesign

8522 readers
1 users here now

This is a community for designs specifically crafted to make the experience worse for the user. This can be due to greed, apathy, laziness or just downright scumbaggery.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ReCursing 53 points 2 months ago

The S*n us a far right shitrag

[–] grue@lemmy.world 51 points 2 months ago (2 children)

People calling the Sun worthless scum are missing the point, which is that this shit ought to be illegal.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's a UK company.
They are under no obligation to comply with GDPR.
Yahoo JP actually shut out all foreign (or at least EU) traffic. They could do the same here if they'd want to

[–] rikudou 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

IIRC, this is allowed under GDPR. At least in my country it doesn't fall under the broad GDPR and a court ordered the company that did it first here to preliminary stop doing it while it's under investigation. But they're doing it again, which leads me to believe the court didn't find any legal basis to ban it.


Just a side note, they are obligated to follow GDPR when dealing with EU customers. Even the US has to (or shut down the access for EU users as many US news sites did).

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

(or shut down the access for EU users as many US news sites did).

Like I mentioned with Yahoo.co.jp

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As I understand it, the "UK GDPR" is basically the same thing as the EU's GDPR. They need to maintain "adequacy" to continue to comply with the UK's laws and guidelines, so they can't simply block all non-UK traffic.

[–] tabris@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Yep, there's been no repeal of the GDPR laws, so they are still officially on the books in the UK.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

It may be. The ICO issued some long waffling guidelines that clarified exactly nothing about it recently https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/online-tracking/consent-or-pay/about-this-guidance/#law

[–] peto@lemm.ee 26 points 2 months ago

Scum practice by a scum company. Nothing of value is lost by not going there.

I don't even think this is top 5 worst things they've done.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

gotta milk those last 5 readers

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

Classic rent seeking spiral

[–] Bruncvik@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

In fairness, they'd have to pay me to view their article. Not read, mind you, just view. I don't think I could force myself to read their articles even if paid.

[–] fckreddit@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 months ago

Why call it "privacy policy", when it clearly is "no privacy policy"?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 8 points 2 months ago

deny the parasite profit

[–] kubica@fedia.io 6 points 2 months ago

The sun taught me that not everything that is posted like news has to have any basis, and you should outright forget entirely what you read when it doesn't come from a trusted source.

[–] EABOD25@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

The Sun is a garbage Buzzfeed wannabe anyway. Much better news sites out there

[–] bravesilvernest@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

G^e^reed for sure!

[–] ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Skipping incurs penalty