All the solution you proposed have big tradeoffs. Most would require to run some code on the site where the URL is, which is often not an option. And they would not work if the link is shared between people. For a lot of cases the solution they used seems to be the best one.

The URL tracking filter list is nice but it doesn’t seems to include anything related to gumroad domain or parameters.

https://filters.adtidy.org/extension/ublock/filters/17.txt

You need to add it yourself.

I don’t understand. Cookies and request method are two different things. You can set cookies on GET.

This is about removing tracking arguments that identify users, this is not the case here.

The example in your link even show it’s keeping campaign tracking arguments. So I’m pretty sure it would keep the one we are talking about here.

Use removeparam.

The URL tracking protection filter list uses this and is a nice list to enable.

An uBlock Origin custom filtrer should do.

Pu-erh for me.

Never get used to this. I get what you are saying but I don’t think this is the right response.

It feels like you are missing the point on purpose. I don’t know why, this feels like laziness.

Criticizing the existence of billionaires and being antiwork are two different things. And being antiwork is different than wanting to do nothing. No one wants to do nothing, except in cases of major depressions.

A lot of antiwork post can lack depth but there are really interesting criticism to be made about work as it’s organized these days. I suggest you dig the subject.

No, use uBlock Origin.

Why would anyone use a browser that requires you to login, especially after that: https://kibty.town/blog/arc/

https://gitflic.ru/user/magnolia1234

Nah, uBlock Origin is the must have, Privacy Badger doesn’t bring anything more.

No one is going to read first hand what you are up to. It’s just companies trying to automate pricing based on data they collect so they can up prices when you need something the most. That’s just one simple example so you can understand but there are plenty of other things you can do with the collected data.

This is also important because they’ll just straight up sell it to data brokers that’ll aggregate it, make it searchable and sell access to it to just anybody. And even if you feel your are not an interesting target now you never know how it’ll be in the futur, once the data is out you can’t do much.

You can re-use those but so does anyone, so you should consider those accounts as public.

Arkenfox put it in the “Don’t bother” list: https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/wiki/4.1-Extensions#-dont-bother

Consent-o-matic is about consent forms, so it’ll fill the consent forms giving, by default, the least consent possible. If it doesn’t know how to handle a form it’ll just not auto-fill it so you’ll have to do it yourself. It’s not just about cookies, they are just one common way to acquire the data. IDCAC will just hide the form, because it was made to hide cookie notices and later extended to do the same for consent forms. According to the law not filling the form, not giving explicit consent, is like refusing it.

Anyway, none of these extension touch cookies directly, they are only about notice and consent forms. It’s up to the website to act accordingly. And none of this will do anything about necessary cookies, or more precisely, about any data deemed necessary, however it’s collected.

That’s not necessarily that useful.

Cookie notices and consent forms are two different things. The first comes from the ePrivacy Directive while the second comes from the GDPR. Consent forms are not only about cookies, the law doesn’t even specify cookies and it’s often using confusing phrasing (like “allow to use personal data collected through cookies or other means”).

I don’t see its usefulness, uBlock Origin’s “Cookie Notices” list does the same thing.

For consent forms consent-o-matic is better, IDCAC / ISDCAC was not created for this.