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

New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

dataprotectioncontrol.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 269 posts

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#241

Post by imiric »

simpss wrote: post #130
dmitryminkovsky wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The annoying and confusing cookie banners are a feature. Not just that, but I’ve never seen a cookie banner that does anything. Cookies get sent down with the page on the initial load. Whenever I’ve opened an inspector to see if cookies get unset by JavaScript in response to my “opting out,” I’ve never seen an effect. The same cookies get sent after I opt out: no change. Has anyone seen a cookie preference banner t…

smaller, local(to me) sites have started to have cookie banners that have an effect. My bank, 1/3 of the bigger news sites here etc... They all started with a single "agree" button, then went to "agree/disagree" with no effect and are finally starting to come around to a functioning disagree button. GDPR also helps here, as it defined what identifies an individual and that made most of the tracking PII even when it's…

> non-identifying tracking for aggregate results

That sounds similar to FLoC, which is still very much identifying[1].

The solution to user tracking isn't less identifying tracking. It's no user tracking.

[1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/privacy-analysis-of-floc...

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#242

Post by presentation »

godshatter wrote: post #182
mikro2nd wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do think that we want personalised ads, though, and tracking cookies are just the tech-at-hand that is the least-cost way to do that.

Do we want personalized ads, though? I don't, but I suspect I'm in a small minority. If I want to purchase something, I'll go do some research. I specifically don't want ads that are designed to try to get me to purchase something I don't need based on some manipulative psychological model based on my browsing behavior. A quick search makes it apparent to me that most people do want personalized ads, or at least thin…

I think it also doesn’t really matter if we want or don’t want them - if people are more likely to click on personalized ads (I’d be surprised if they aren’t) then they’ll do it anyway. Just so happens it sounds appealing to some.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#243

Post by imiric »

quotemstr wrote: post #222
duckmysick wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights about privacy regarding medical records, but various jurisdictions agree that it's worth protecting. > Sorry, but "you shouldn't be able to collect information" isn't an argument. How about "private entities shouldn't be able to collect my information without my explicit consent". > It's a wish. Nobody is under any obligation to indulge the wishes of random…

> How about "private entities shouldn't be able to collect my information without my explicit consent" Keeping a diary or a phone contact list would be forbidden under a strict reading of that rule. Even remembering the name of a person you met at a party would be forbidden unless you ask for explicit consent first. "Hey, Joe. Great to meet you. Mind if I make a mental note connecting your face to your name?" Real pe…

The issue is not with individuals keeping track of relationships and their contact lists. It's with how that information is further used, shared and sold. I wouldn't be pleased if a friend whom I trusted with my contact information shared it with others without my consent, and I would be very displeased if it ended up on Facebook[1].

PII is very valuable to advertisers (or to adtech as I recently learned[2]) as it allows them to target individuals based on interest. Beyond the fact that I don't enjoy being forced into complicitness to being manipulated into purchasing a product, I strongly object to having a profile in some mega-corp's database that has my personal information I didn't agree to share with them, for them to disect, analyze and sell in perpetuity, and to wonder how future advancements in adtech might use this data in less benign ways than today.

At the very least, I would like a share of the profits they're making from me. Facebook and Google should be paying users to use their products, or everyone on the internet rather, but I don't think their shareholders would like that very much.

[1]: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-uploaded-1-5-millio...

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27531714

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#244

Post by jka »

nickpp wrote: post #163
M2Ys4U wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GDPR doesn't even mention cookies. It's the ePrivacy Directive that regulates them (or, more precisely, "information stored in the terminal equipment of a subscriber"). And the ePrivacy Directive does , in fact, define what's allowed without notifying the user: "any technical storage or access for the sole purpose of carrying out or facilitating the transmission of a communication over an electronic communication…

This kind of vague, high-level language is exactly why, if you reject cookies, you'll receive the same damn popup next time you visit the website until you relent and click Yes. They never tried applying their abstract concepts to the real world until we had to and the result is "The Web of Cookie Popups".

You have a point, but at the other end of the spectrum, writing precise legal terms can cause problems as well.

If the terms refer specifically to "cookies" and "browsers", it'd be entirely possible that the advertising industry and other players would simply change their own wording to evade the law.

An effective legal claim might be able to find out about and catch up with those kind of tricks; but it'd be partly a game of time, and simply by delaying legal challenges while their operations continue, the ad industry would have achieved their goals.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#245

Post by aembleton »

gorgoiler wrote: post #207

This week I told iOS safari to block all cookies. It’s really not that awful. In fact, it’s kind of fantastic. I use a second browser (Google Chrome) for “signed-in stuff”. Try it. (Although the fact that I just posted this from safari reminds me I’m not 100% up to speed on which-browser-for-what-activity discipline.)

How were you able to post that on Safari without cookies? HN needs to set a cookie called 'user' to know that you're logged in.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#246

Post by aembleton »

pacman2 wrote: post #226

I use the I don't care about cookies Plug-in. My browser forgets all the cookies when closed. Besides several privacy plug-ins, I the the temporary container plug-in. Problem solved.

I don't care about cookies also provides a filter list that you can add to uBO - https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/abp/

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#247

Post by imiric »

morelisp wrote: post #186
Ensorceled wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fundamentally misunderstanding how internet advertising works: advertises will pay higher CPM for precise targeting and attribution publishers want the best CPM they can get adtech uses as many tricks as possible to get as much information as possible about a user so they can maximize the CPM the advertiser will pay Publishers just end up doing what ever their adtech partners tell them will give them the best…

Haha, no. You're falling for the trick, or maybe you're just 10 years behind. Publishers (and retailers, and anyone with a dataset) seek out adtech partner companies, to justify high CPMs and to sell their audience data . Adtech companies are market-makers, it's been years since the data they can get independently of supply-side partners was worth shit. The publisher is the one with the cookie warning and consent for…

You're being very generous to adtech's role in this. Any undisclosed bias?

Adtech is very much instrumental in the race to extract as much value from attention as possible.

Adtech built a market for advertisers to target users based on interest (which may or may not be a scam[1]). Advertisers exploit this and other tools at their disposal (astroturfing, embedded marketing, etc.), but they're certainly not as vicious or out of control as what adtech can produce.

The publisher has my information if I give it to them or if they buy it somewhere. Adtech has it regardless of what I do. Why would a publisher even want a model of me when what they want is for their product to reach me on as many sites as possible, not just their own? An adtech company having as much information on everyone can serve many publishers, so it's no wonder the system is so centralized.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27531714

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#248

Post by pacman2 »

aembleton wrote: post #246
pacman2 wrote: post #226

I use the I don't care about cookies Plug-in. My browser forgets all the cookies when closed. Besides several privacy plug-ins, I the the temporary container plug-in. Problem solved.

I don't care about cookies also provides a filter list that you can add to uBO - https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/abp/

How does this work? What is the advantage?

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#249

Post by squiggleblaz »

StavrosK wrote: post #239
squiggleblaz wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently came across a website that makes the "Accept all cookies" button secondary and the the "accept necessary" primary. It's such an effort to actually press the primary button — I have been so trained by the completely disdainful behavior of the majority of websites.

I saw the exact same thing and was surprised too! I wonder if it was a site that was on HN... I press "accept all" by accident and thought "wow".

Well I needed to visit the website due to an unfortunate event in meatspace - in no way hacker news related. So it seems there's definitely at least two sites which do it!

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#250

Post by howaboutnope »

leokennis wrote: post #103
pornel wrote: post #7

Reminder that we've already had a spec for it. In the 90s! And it even has been implemented in the Internet Explorer: https://www.w3.org/P3P/ It did absolutely nothing for privacy. Google has been sending bogus P3P headers that broke IE's implementation and allowed all cookies. Adtech companies don't want users to have an easy opt-out. They didn't want P3P. They didn't want DNT. They will not want this new spec, unle…

This exactly. This is also why I never feel "ashamed" when sites ask me to please disable my ad blocker because when I block ads they'll go out of business. Or why I'll always decline even "user respecting" ads on sites. We're fighting the ad and tracking industry here, the internet equivalent of a gang member with a shiv and a length of pipe. I'm not going to fight nicely. I'll deny you any chance and any method I g…

> People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs.

-- Banksy

Post reply on HN