Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

markosaric.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 457 posts

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#311

Post by theocs »

nicbou wrote: post #217
blauditore wrote: post #206

What 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…

If I can't opt out in two clicks, I leave the website and click the next search result.

Or I just right click open it in private mode

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#312

Post by vertex-four »

vorpalhex wrote: post #298
ginko wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say the stock owners.

So pension funds and teacher's unions? Grandpa's nest egg?

If people were affected by the things they give companies money to do, perhaps they'd be a lot more careful about what they give companies money to do.

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#313

Post by Dylan16807 »

iso1631 wrote: post #162
elcomet wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that tracking here is used for advertisment and not to give you a better service. Would you still accept it ?

Some people would rather have products they are interested in rather than products they aren't interested in

Some people would rather have products relevant to the site they are on rather than products irrelevant to the site they are on

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#314

Post by jimmaswell »

blauditore wrote: post #206

What 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…

You can't take someone's lifeline away and act surprised when they try to get around it. Of course websites will do what they can to remain viable.

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#315

Post by shadowgovt »

shakna wrote: post #286
gear54rus wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doesn't show up in my history AND drop all cookies from all domains. > There are many, many, ways There probably are. I haven't ever seen it work though. If I get into incognito, my ads show something different my normal profile. In theory, they can track you from your OS/browser combination (and many more variables), but is there a way to test it?

It isn't theoretical. Google is currently facing a lawsuit (Brown et al v Google LLC et al) for tracking people who assumed Chrome's incognito meant Google would stop tracking them. [0] [0] https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2020/06/google-facing-us5-7-billi...

That's a hilarious premise for a lawsuit, because that's never what incognito mode meant.

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#317

Post by Dylan16807 »

jariel wrote: post #155
alkonaut wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Needing ad revenue and needing to track visitors are different things. Structurally obviously we are now in a situation where “well targeted ads” can generate some revenue, and “well behaved ads” barely can. The future has to be one where dumber ads pay more because tracking isn’t technically possible and/or illegal.

"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,…

Even tracking ads don't allow many sites to make a decent dollar!

But if we assume that tracking ads provide enough revenue, and we make the tracking illegal, once the market settles I bet that non-tracking ads will be reasonably close.

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#318

Post by JKCalhoun »

bambax wrote: post #93
davidweatherall wrote: post #2

The 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…

Why would anyone consent to be tracked if given a real choice? What are the benefits? The 9% look like an error.

I was told it would make my shopping experience more targeted. That I would want my materialism overlords to have a detailed accounting of my wants and likes to make consuming oh so much easier.

Re: Only 9% of visitors give GDPR consent to be tracked

#319

Post by Hokusai »

jimmaswell wrote: post #314
blauditore wrote: post #206

What 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…

You can't take someone's lifeline away and act surprised when they try to get around it. Of course websites will do what they can to remain viable.

There is many people that will change their business model once it's unlawful. Not everybody is willing to break the law.

But, there is people that does not care for their customers nor the law. From safety food violations to illegal pollution of air or rivers. That's why we need more strict law enforcement for companies.

Post reply on HN