261–270 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cookie thing sounds good at first but then it shows that they rant to reduce cookiewalls by making more things ok without asking :(
Yes. I don't think you should have to show a popup to track the user's language preferences, whether they want a header toggled on or off, or other such harmless preferences. Yet, the EU ePrivacy directive (separately from the GDPR) really does require popups to inform users of these "cookies".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Far less than 1% of people would care about either.
But far more than 1% are harmed by it. Sometimes the harm is severe. Vast oceans of poorly handled personal data collected in exquisite and unnecessary detail by dark patterns, copied around to everyone who might be interested with low regard for security, kept forever, analysed by the best algorithms and sold to whomever will buy it, raise the risks and consequences of identity theft and fraud for everyone. Those ar…
I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.
Browser level consent primitives would be a significant improvement on the status quo.
You can still turn cookies off in your user agent though.
I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.
Innovation isn't worth it for innovation's sake, though. Europe could easily profit watching others innovate and taking what makes sense for europe. I don't see anything about GDPR that would harm innovation or long-term success for europe.
It's the same thing as any other regulation -- regulatory burden. Laws aren't code, they need interpretation. That means you need your own lawyer to tell you an interpretation that they feel they can defend in front of a judge.
There is a cost to that. In both time and money. I am the CEO of a startup who is subject to GDPR. The amount of time and money we've spent just making sure we are in compliance is quite high, and we barely operate in Europe and don't collect PII.
You can wing it and say "this looks easy, I can do this on my own!" and maybe you can. For a while. But no serious business is going to try to DIY any regulations.
I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.
Yes, the solution is clearer rules. What drives compliance costs up is rarely the compliance itself, it's usually the uncertainty about your being in compliance or not. That's also true for tax laws, labor laws, environment laws, almost every safety code out there, building zoning...
But uncertainty in compliance and time spent navigating compliance is nearly pure waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those “cookie banners” are nonsense aimed at getting this outcome. This is a loss for European citizens and small businesses and a win for the trillion dollar ecosystem of data abuse.
How can you comply with the current requirements without cookie banners? Why would EU governments use cookie banners if they are just nonsense meant to degrade approval of GDPR?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you comply with the current requirements without cookie banners? Why would EU governments use cookie banners if they are just nonsense meant to degrade approval of GDPR?
> Why would EU governments use cookie banners They generally don't, because you don't need banners to store cookies that you need to store to have a working site . In other words, if you see cookie banner, somebody is asking to store/track stuff about you that's not really needed . Cookie banners were invented by the market as a loophole to continue dark patterns and bad practices. EU is catching flak because its ext…
I hate how everyone and their mother ships all my data to google and others just because they can.
I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.