One click opt out should be mandatory. It's obviously unscrupulous to force you to go through several pages of text when I could've clicked one button. Most the time I just use a special blocker script or reader mode.
Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
201–210 of 457 posts
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#202Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly don't trust governments/bureaucrats to be able to come up with a solution for this issue. This is one of those problems that evolves very quickly, and the solution probably needs to be done by a private company or by each person individually.
I have the complete opposite view. Companies provably can't be trusted on anything touching privacy, and individuals don't have any power to act on it. Governmental oversight and bureaucracy is the only tool that works for a problem like this. It's a proven, efficient, and universally approved way to already enforce food, fire, travel safety and so on. It's only logical that privacy safety follows the same steps. GDP…
But privacy isn't like food, fire or travel safety. Even assuming absolute cynicism it isn't very exploitable for them to use it for bad purposes.
I liken the difference between actors to a housecat and a large dog with a lamb. The cat at worst could give some scratches but at worst would probably just annoy the lamb jumping into its wool and kneading it. The dog ideally would look after tbe lamb but could also inflict serious bites or even rip out its throat if it wants. Both may want the meat but only one has the ability to kill it to get what it wants. When it comes to unknowns as the lamb I would go with the cat as opposed to the dog out of sheer distrust.
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#204Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#205Wait. You tracked users after they opted out of tracking? How else did you get this data?
GDPR doesn't actually require consent to process personal data. It requires that the processing be lawful . Consent is one basis for lawfulness, but it is not the only one. There are 5 others. One of these is that the processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest. You could probably make a colorable argument that research for publication into the effectiveness of GDPR implem…
Not if you're a private company or an individual
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#206What really drives me crazy are prompts that start by showing two options: "Consent to all cookies", or "customize". If you click "customize", it opens a new modal window with a loading indicator that just doesn't seem to finish. I literally waited 60 seconds and then tried again by refreshing the page, ending up with another infinite loading indicator.
This means that users are de-factor forced to click "consent to all". I'm not even sure if that's legal.
Now, this was not some obscure small website, but the official Java documentation on docs.oracle.com! They use some third-party service for that - I just tried again, and though it worked this time, it still took 30+ seconds to submit my settings. I have a very hard time to believe this has technical reasons. Either this was made slow on purpose, or built by a bunch of morons.
/rant
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The future has to be one where dumber ads pay more because tracking isn’t technically possible and/or illegal." So you're inching closer to the reality. Read your statement again though: where is this 'magical ad tech' that enables newsies to make a decent dolllar? It's non existent. Ergo, they are out of business and you get severely limited content. So, either people can chose to share some basic information, pay,…
You mean we are going to see proportionally more content from people who actually know what they are writing about rather than professional clickbait writers? Doesn't seem so bleak to me.
I am afraid the incentives are we'll see more press releases from sources. Guess who has an interest in paying to publish and host things? Those who have content which makes them look good. Not exclusively of course but certainly a higher proportion. Ironically the clickbait crap makes that sort of shilling less effective akin to how TV ads have less influence with streaming. It displaces the views and thus reduces incentive to produce it.
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#208What really drives me crazy are prompts that start by showing two options: "Consent to all cookies", or "customize". If you click "customize", it opens a new modal window with a loading indicator that just doesn't seem to finish. I literally waited 60 seconds and then tried again by refreshing the page, ending up with another infinite loading indicator. This means that users are de-factor forced to click "consent to…
I know exactly which prompt you’re talking about, it’s very common around the web.
Unfortunately, the only solution I found that fixes it is disabling ad and tracker blockers. They seem to break that prompt, though if you set them to be very aggressive, the prompt disappears altogether.
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#209The author's consent form is very simple and isn't using any shady UX tricks to get the user to consent. One action will opt you in, one action will opt you out. I wonder what results you would see for something like yahoo, the daily mail, reddit, or other sites that heavily rely on ad revenue, which attempt to force the user to accept the cookies through non-obvious no buttons, or long processes to opt out of cookie…
Verizon/Yahoo/Techcrunch is such a blatant offender, and especially noticable because they get posted here often. Their modal is a giant obfuscation dark-pattern, and far as I can tell, there is no way to opt out.
Check out the ublock origin annoyances list, which will block cookie and gdpr pop-ups without breaking most websites.
Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean we are going to see proportionally more content from people who actually know what they are writing about rather than professional clickbait writers? Doesn't seem so bleak to me.
'Unpaid home hobbyist writers' don't have more credibility than newsrooms, with budgets, copy editors, massive networks of sources, researchers, professional staff support - which costs money.
I thought the 00s proved that embarassingly that they did, as five minutes of fact checking with a search engine proved they had gotten Middle School level facts deeply wrong.