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

431–440 of 457 posts

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

#431

Post by AnthonyMouse »

cycomanic wrote: post #238
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not in the airline's interest because then the plane crashes and they lose a hundred million dollar plane and get sued and go bankrupt. It could be in an individual manager's interest because then they get a bonus and are working for some other company by the time the plane crashes, but the airline itself has the aforementioned incentive to put processes into place all on their own to prevent that from happeni…

Your argument is all "logical" but it does not agree with reality, the boeing 737 Max is a prime example.

Only then you're proving the other point just as much, because the 737 Max is also subject to the bureaucratic regulatory system being held up as an exemplar of something that works.

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

#432

Post by merb »

takeda wrote: post #409
rhizome wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OneTrust, Evidon, and the rest of the "privacy management" services...why can't I just click once at their site that I don't want any cookies from any of the companies that use them? I just went through a thing with Evidon where each of their opt outs is a JS-required redirect, and when you get to a company like Adobe, you have to click on a million things with a million disappointments. https://imgur.com/a/d2qMJqn I…

It's clear, that the GDPR should be amended so the only way that tracking will be allowed is to have user send a notary signed letter every year saying that s/he wants to be tracked with a minimum 3 pages of attachment explanation why tracking is so great (in own words, no templates allowed). The company will be required to keep physical copies of these letters for 10 years for random checkups. Fuck the adtech indust…

dont you like personalized ad's? btw. I do not get the adtech industry either, most of these targeted ads are definitiv not in my favor.

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

#433

Post by Retric »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #431
cycomanic wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument is all "logical" but it does not agree with reality, the boeing 737 Max is a prime example.

Only then you're proving the other point just as much, because the 737 Max is also subject to the bureaucratic regulatory system being held up as an exemplar of something that works.

For 2 crashes out of 387 aircraft and several hundred thousand flights to be considered unacceptably dangerous suggests the system is largely working as intended. The aircraft had 0 fatalities in US or EU, globally an order of magnitude safer than driving, and it was still grounded.

Imagine if we took car safety so seriously.

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

#434

Post by richardwhiuk »

rpastuszak wrote: post #390
richardwhiuk wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear to me that the dark UX forms are legal.

It doesn’t seem to matter: https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.02479

Huh? That says that only 11.8% are lawful.

Obviously this is all pending enforcement actions actually taking place, but it's not obvious that will never happen.

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

#435

Post by jjeaff »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #331
dimitrios1 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Causing you to get angry is all it takes to warrant justification for jail time in your eyes? I am thankful you aren't in charge of any lawmaking.

Jail time is probably the only suitable enough deterrent for adtech nightmares. Fines are just treated as a cost of doing business expense, and doesn't directly even hurt the terrible people making these decisions. When someone commits a wrong, the punishment is in part based on the amount of harm. You might feel that adtech causes small harms, if you look at harm against an individual, but adtech folks harm billions…

No amount of fines would make a difference? I beg to differ. Make the fines high enough, bill them to the executives personally, I guarantee it will make a difference.

A large enough fine could literally take the company and thus their power away from them. A large enough fine could literally bankrupt the company.

The problem is simply that the fines aren't big enough.

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

#436

Post by jjeaff »

ViViDboarder wrote: post #342
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jail time is probably the only suitable enough deterrent for adtech nightmares. Fines are just treated as a cost of doing business expense, and doesn't directly even hurt the terrible people making these decisions. When someone commits a wrong, the punishment is in part based on the amount of harm. You might feel that adtech causes small harms, if you look at harm against an individual, but adtech folks harm billions…

Exactly. Facebook and Google have been fined in the past and it’s never amounted to anything for them. When they make more Money from engaging in bad behavior than the fine costs, it’s a law they’d be stupid not to break.

Then make the fines double what they made from it.

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

#437

Post by ByteJockey »

alkonaut wrote: post #170
ByteJockey wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The future has to be one where dumber ads pay more because tracking isn’t technically possible and/or illegal. The other option is that everything ad supported goes out of business because the ROI on dumb ads is negative. I don't want to sound like I know this for a fact, but I'd just like to point out that the future doesn't "have" to be anything. There are always multiple options.

> The other option is that everything ad supported goes out of business because the ROI on dumb ads is negative. Yes by “has to be” I was expressing a personal desire and prediction, nothing else. It’s probably not one or the other but somewhere in between.

That's fair. I think I was tired when I read your original comment.

You have a nice day.

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

#438

Post by anoncake »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #136
gear54rus wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to remind you and everyone else about Firefox reader mode. Solves like 99% of this user-enslaving shit.

And this is really the solution to all of it in the end. A user agent which is actually an agent of the user. Can't wait until first party isolation is the default in browsers.

You can't wait till websites use first-party cookies to track their users?

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

#439

Post by anoncake »

Mirioron wrote: post #70
black_puppydog wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, privacy as a personal responsibility has failed outright. For many services there is simply no (online, i.e. practically relevant) alternative, because none of the market players have an incentive to be privacy preserving (think major news outlets) or because the service is not interchangable due to network effects (facebook, twitter etc). The GDPR is actually sufficiently abstract IMO to make government enfor…

> For many services there is simply no (online, i.e. practically relevant) alternative, because none of the market players have an incentive to be privacy preserving (think major news outlets) or because the service is not interchangable due to network effects (facebook, twitter etc). But here's the big question: would these services have even existed in the first place if these laws had been in place? The internet h…

If Facebook etc. wouldn't exists if users knew their prices – ad-infested websites require everyone to pay because companies recoup the cost of advertising by charging higher prices – then by the logic of a market economy they shouldn't exist.

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

#440

Post by anoncake »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #114
chillfox wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The payment processing overhead has nothing to do with rules and everything to do with Mastercard and Visa having decided to not compete on fees.

Then why don't you go into competition with them and undercut them on fees, if the rules make it so easy? Why doesn't anybody?

Barriers of entry exist and have nothing to do with rules.
Post reply on HN