31–40 of 127 posts
I've set my browser to delete cookies at close. You can accept all cookies without problem, and after lunch everything is forgotten. A few websites that I go to often get special treatment (Hacker News!), because I'm to lazy to press ok each time.
I've set my browser to delete cookies at close. You can accept all cookies without problem, and after lunch everything is forgotten. A few websites that I go to often get special treatment (Hacker News!), because I'm to lazy to press ok each time.
That's not the same. This forces you to close the browser regularly and they can still track you while your browsing session. Your approach doesn't say no, it's a yes with expiration date.
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
The EU should have mandated an interaction-free solution like Do Not Track. They could have.
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.
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.
It was; nobody cared (due to lack of any legislation/enforcement); it died. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P3P
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
No he isn't. The law is precisely what allows the intentionally bad implementations. Anyone could have foreseen this. Hell we already knew this would happen based on the earlier cookie laws. The EU should have mandated an interaction-free solution like Do Not Track. They could have.
Consent for personal data is implied when performing services for a user (e.g. logging in, shopping carts, remembering high-scores, etc.).
Interactions are only needed when consent is not implied; i.e. when the personal data is not performing a service for a user; i.e. when the user is the product, not the customer.
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.
Firefox has a pretty decent system for this I believe. They also try to go against alternatives like 'local-storage' and a whole slew of other attempts at fingerprinting / creating super-cookies.