21–30 of 73 posts
>
> By clicking "Accept all" you agree that Verizon Media and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through the use of cookies and similar technologies and process your personal data, to display personalised ads and content, for ad and content measurement, audience insights and product development.
The irony.
An article dissing cookie popups has a cookie popup with no easy opt out. Amazing.
It's easy to make that take. But try to see the story from the other side. The person writing that article is a journalist who almost certainly has no direct connection to the ad department of his site and the people who are responsible for the cookie banner. (I sympathize, because I'm a journalist with no direct connection to any of those things.) It's an unfortunate reality that most media orgs use shitty ad tech.…
Ideally there would be a standardized opt-out button with a recognizable icon in a banner of limited size at the top
Maybe even integrate that in the browser's privacy overview?
The Gist: A non-profit developed a cralwer which can pick up misleading (or non-working) cookie-consent banners. > with a plan to file up to 10,000 complaints against offenders over the course of this year > Today it’s announcing the first batch of 560 complaints, large and small > noyb is even giving offenders a warning first — and a full month to clean up their ways In general I'm not a fan of vigilante law enforce…
No need for any banner if you only use cookies for legitimate interest.
I'm aware that once I enter somebody's site there's a gazillion ways for that somebody to get data about me. If cookies are blocked they'll find another way.
But thanks to Europe's feeling they need to nanny me, I get those obnoxious cookie warning popups on every site I visit. Worse, I can't opt out of the popups. Infuriatingly, Europe didn't ask me if I _want_ to be protected like this.
Of the many problems with the Internet and Web sites, I feel Europe has fixed the most trivial, in the most obnoxious possible way. Thanks for nothing, Europe!
No. Let's make one thing clear. The problem is with the popup itself, with the fact that it exists. And it exists because the bone-headed law that required it: the GDPR.
The fact that the very first decision I have to make when visiting a website is about an issue I don't five a flying f&$# about is mind-boggling.
The fact that somebody decided to elevate for me something completely harmless ("tracking me online") to a level more important than any other issue when it comes to web browsing is absolutely incredible.
The fact that the cost of both the implementation of this on the website and that of the stupid selection imposed on the site visitor was completely ignored is aggressively idiotic.
And the fact that "somebody" made that decision into one of the most ambiguous, evasive, but at the same incredibly punishing laws around is criminal.
How do we know this? The perfect A/B test. We had the web before GDPR. It wasn't pretty but it worked. Now we have the web after GDPR. It's a cluster-f&$%. The only thing that changed: the stupid law.
Abolish GDPR!
I was and still am totally amazed that people still think it's a good idea to require each individual site owner to comply with that kind of policy instead of letting the browser vendors do the hard work. Which is easier - to modify and monitor billions of different sites, or to create a framework and obligations on the side of browsers to handle it? Something like requiring all browsers to start with cookies disable…
This is TechCrunch cookie consent. https://i.imgur.com/laO6kiw.png
It's cookie consents all the way down...
