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

Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 127 posts

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#21

Post by the_gipsy »

nailer wrote: post #10

Just remove cookie banners unless you’re using an ad network (this includes keeping them if you’re using google products). Users want to use your website rather than look it through a porthole, understand that websites remember you, and cookie banners are killing the web in favour of closed app stores.

Analytics also require consent. There are some non-mainstream solution that promise that no consent is required, but you better make sure with a lawyer.

Sadly, every marketing person and their dog insist on having analytics. Even more sadly, every product person is not capable on putting their foot down against an obviously bad cookie banner UX.

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#22

Post by TrianguloY »

TuringTest wrote: post #17

The button is more prominent, yes. And it's still useless. Most tracking now comes from the "legitimate interest" purposes that you need to actively object to, which is buried in a tertiary hidden panel or not available at all, or even forces you to object to several dozens of trackers one by one.

At least most websites still offer an object to all button.

not fandom.com, there you need to click on 175 enabled-by-default switches:

    div[data-tracking-opt-in-overlay=true] input[type=checkbox][id^=switch]:checked

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#23

Post by stoltzmann »

nailer wrote: post #10

Just remove cookie banners unless you’re using an ad network (this includes keeping them if you’re using google products). Users want to use your website rather than look it through a porthole, understand that websites remember you, and cookie banners are killing the web in favour of closed app stores.

>Just remove cookie banners unless you’re using an ad network

You also need a cookie banner in EU in case your website uses any cookies that are not necessary to serve the content. This includes analytics, telemetry, and so on. It's not only ads.

You can remove the cookie banner if your website uses cookies only for required functionality like log-on.

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#24

Post by viraptor »

fredsted wrote: post #4

The EU cookie legislation was a mistake made by tech-illiterate bureaucrats that ruined the Web to a large degree. It's something that could've been built in to the browser. I have a hard time understanding why one would dedicate their time to this.

There is no cookie legislation. There's data protection and privacy legislation. Cookies and banners are just how industry is dealing with it because they're dragged kicking and screaming towards what's actually slowly being enforced.

If you really believe it's a cookie legislation from tech-illiterate, I recommend reading the document. You're in for a surprise. (in a good way)

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#25

Post by viraptor »

baxtr wrote: post #19
fredsted wrote: post #4

The EU cookie legislation was a mistake made by tech-illiterate bureaucrats that ruined the Web to a large degree. It's something that could've been built in to the browser. I have a hard time understanding why one would dedicate their time to this.

100% I think the underlying reason is that most people don’t consider trade-offs. “Yes, great let’s do the cookie banner thing. But before, let’s also consider how this could be a bad idea?” “Yes, great let’s ban plastic straws. But also let’s consider what we get instead and if that alternative is really better.” These conversations rarely take place in my experience. You can still decide to do it, but at least you…

"the cookie banner thing" was essentially created by the ad / tracking industry, so aim your annoyance in the right direction.

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#27

Post by ptstomp »

fredsted wrote: post #4

The EU cookie legislation was a mistake made by tech-illiterate bureaucrats that ruined the Web to a large degree. It's something that could've been built in to the browser. I have a hard time understanding why one would dedicate their time to this.

One of the most painful parts is sites that don't even seem to remember your choices. The number of times i've said 'ok' to the canonical ubuntu cookies is infuriating. If i've accepted cookies, please at least use a long held one to remember it!

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#28

Post by Vinnl »

croes wrote: post #15
fredsted wrote: post #4

The EU cookie legislation was a mistake made by tech-illiterate bureaucrats that ruined the Web to a large degree. It's something that could've been built in to the browser. I have a hard time understanding why one would dedicate their time to this.

You are confusing the law with the intentionally bad implementation. And it was implemented in the browser as Do Not Track but websites ignored it https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track

And the bad (and actually non-compliant) implementations are getting cracked down on, but that just takes time. But the article mentions an example:

> the French CNIL introduced guidelines and required Google to introduce a "reject" button, which was also seen as a sign to many companies to adjust their banners and lead to major measuarable improvements in France.

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#29

Post by syspec »

thomas-st wrote: post #2

I wish cookie settings were part of the browser (e.g. I want to reject all marketing cookies but not essential ones), have a way in JS/HTTP to indicate the type of the cookie, and never see those cookie popups again.

The most widely used browser is run by the company that serves most of the ads.

So that's pretty unlikely

Re: Where did all the “reject” buttons come from?

#30

Post by Vinnl »

TuringTest wrote: post #17

The button is more prominent, yes. And it's still useless. Most tracking now comes from the "legitimate interest" purposes that you need to actively object to, which is buried in a tertiary hidden panel or not available at all, or even forces you to object to several dozens of trackers one by one.

I just expect that to be the next step in the long-ish road to improvements. The inaccessibility of the "Reject all" button was the most prominent issue, but as that gets addressed, the next step will probably be court battles to more clearly define what legitimate interest is and isn't, and if the advertisers win that, I'd expect the legislation to be updated to narrow that category down.
Post reply on HN