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

People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 265 posts

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#191

Post by pgcj_poster »

jobs_throwaway wrote: post #139
tejtm wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

normalizes expectation of others inserting ideas in ones head instead of critically assessing concepts with available observations and deriving one's own opinion for starters

why can't consumers critically assess ads the way they critically assess things like this post? what makes ads uniquely menacing?

Most ads have no content that can be subjected to critical assessment. Geico's terrible comedy sketches are not designed to convince you that they have a good product – they're designed to rattle around in your mind and influence you subconsciously. To the extent that they succeed in that, they make people behave less rationally, and are of negative social utility. And if they don't succeed, then they're just a pointless drain on society's money, time, talent, and attention.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#192

Post by adhesive_wombat »

raverbashing wrote: post #122
logicalmonster wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're talking about the businesses' motivations and I'm talking about the random EU bureaucrats that imposed the regulations. Despite how skeptical I am of most government interventions, I'd tend to assign benign intentions on the bureaucrats part here as I'd have to guess that they genuinely wanted to do something good. But like any bureaucrats sitting in their ivory towers imposing rules on others, the maj…

> imposing rules on others, the majority of their rules have unintended consequences, can be taken advantage of, are usually designed by committees It's a valid critique, so here goes: how would you implement it to avoid those?

The rules are actually fairly sensible: the fact that the banners are deliberately confusing is actually illegal. The issue is that national agencies who enforce the rules (because EU rules are implemented via national laws) aren't enforcing the rules properly.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#193

Post by eurasiantiger »

omnicognate wrote: post #37
kmeisthax wrote: post #3

>those in charge of the cookie banners really believe that they protect the interests of the user No, they're asking for consent to track because the EU demanded it. The easiest way to avoid having a banner on your site is to... just not have an analytics package on your site. They're aggressive because they don't want their data spigot turned off - hence the work-to-rule nonsense. You should not infer any benevolenc…

> My personal habit is to always click whatever option denies the most amount of tracking, mostly because I can. Likewise, except: * If for any reason I can't easily deny all the unnecessary stuff (eg. there isn't a way or they have something like the Daily Mail where to disable all the "legitimate interest" you have to click literally hundreds of individual boxes) I don't click anything and leave the site immediatel…

Those consent boxes are nowadays used to blanket consent to things like telemarketing. I would never tell anyone to click agree on anything they haven’t thoroughly read, except proprietary software EULAs.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#194

Post by EEBio »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #99

As others have said, I usually click "refuse" or accept the very minimum possible, if it doesn't look fishy. If there's too much work, like I have to uncheck every one of a zillion boxes, or if there's the trustarc or what's-it-called that needs to "work on it" for 10 minutes, I just leave the site. I do this in the hopes that someone in marketing looks at the stats of people specifically refusing, takes note, and ma…

Funnily enough, "accept tracking or pay subscription" is very much illegal under GDPR. Lack of consent to tracking may not alter functionality of the site.

In other words, service providers are not allowed to discriminate against users based on their tracking preference.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#195

Post by adhesive_wombat »

andrewaylett wrote: post #154
codedokode wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if someone wrote a browser extension that hides those popups (or makes them scrollable instead of sticky), the user would not need to do anything to reject cookies.

This one: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-a... Works brilliantly :).

Note that sometimes that may accept cookies (not sure when it does that, but it does say it can do).

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#196

Post by eurasiantiger »

toxik wrote: post #125
kmeisthax wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft pulled an Apple and turned DNT into opt-in. Advertisers were very clear that they would only honor DNT if it people were tracked by default. The EU then passed a bill that said you can't collect data unless it's for one of six reasons, one of which is "user consent". This basically mandated opt-in, so everyone went super-aggressive on consent banners (which, BTW, are probably illegal).

Consent popups are legal so long as agreeing is not easier than disagreeing. Iow, you cannot make it harder to disagree - which 99.95% of them do.

Revoking consent must also be as easy as consenting. Almost no site does this correctly.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#198

Post by eurasiantiger »

trompetenaccoun wrote: post #184
toxik wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consent popups are legal so long as agreeing is not easier than disagreeing. Iow, you cannot make it harder to disagree - which 99.95% of them do.

Seems like a good case for a class action suit. Why hasn't this happened yet?

Because it would have hundreds of millions of people in it.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#199

Post by gog »

stilisstuk wrote: post #141
jonny_eh wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The easiest way to avoid having a banner on your site is to... just not have an analytics package on your site. What if there's back-end only analytics? Does that require a banner?

My understanding; ip adresses are considered personal information. You are allowed to store them in your log for security purposes, without consent (legitimate interest). But if you use that log for analytics, you need consent.

Are you sure about this? Parsing the logs stored for legitimate interest and then aggregating from that data for another purpose without storing PII seems to me like fair game.

Re: People who press on cookie banners anything except “agree” – why do you do that?

#200

Post by jobs_throwaway »

kzrdude wrote: post #163
jobs_throwaway wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why can't consumers critically assess ads the way they critically assess things like this post? what makes ads uniquely menacing?

Their sheer volume. Drive into a major city in some country where ads are entirely unregulated. There will be billboards everywhere, impossible to take it all in or critically assess it.

as opposed to the internet, where the content is bounded and manageable? I fail to see how you can square such disdain for ads while taking part in an online forum like hackernews
Post reply on HN