I see some synergy between this and the "iOS keyboard sucks" thread. Maybe they can regulate that next.
I'm curious how they plan to pretend to enforce this. Will you need a loisence to implement infinite scroll?
The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
31–40 of 979 posts
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#32[flagged]
> Why would anyone care about something like this ... Because it is a dangerous addiction [1] with recognised adverse effects on human health. Like sugar, tobacco, or drugs. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46959832
Lets do the nanny state!
(As I get older, unironically. I want my productive worker bees to be drug free, addiction free, enjoying simple pleasures that do not put me at risk. They pay Social Security. Everything is nice and safe. Freedom? Yeah no thanks, get to work and pay your taxes.)
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't have to have a cookie popup if you don't do stupid stuff. Don't use anything other than strictly necessary cookies and you are good to go. Disclaimer: I anal and this is not legal advice.
Having worked at multiple companies and talked to multiple legal teams about this, they tend to be very conservative. So the guidance I've gotten is that if we store any information at all on the person's computer, even to know whether they've visited the site before, we still need a cookie banner. Basically, the law created enough fear among the lawyers that software developers are being advised to include the cooki…
> even to know whether they've visited the site before
So uh, don't do that.
You don't need to notify if you use cookies for required functionality like login sessions or remembering a functional setting.
If you're tracking whether they're returning or not your activity is exactly the kind of behaviour the rule is covering because, in legal terms, it's skeezy as fuck.
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having worked at multiple companies and talked to multiple legal teams about this, they tend to be very conservative. So the guidance I've gotten is that if we store any information at all on the person's computer, even to know whether they've visited the site before, we still need a cookie banner. Basically, the law created enough fear among the lawyers that software developers are being advised to include the cooki…
So? You're not arguing that we should get rid of 'reasonable' laws out of misinterpretations of them, are you?
Laws should be evaluated on the effect they actually have on society, rather than the effect that we wish they had on society. I am very critical of laws that fail this test, and I think they should be updated to improve their performance. We want the right outcome, not the right rules.
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having worked at multiple companies and talked to multiple legal teams about this, they tend to be very conservative. So the guidance I've gotten is that if we store any information at all on the person's computer, even to know whether they've visited the site before, we still need a cookie banner. Basically, the law created enough fear among the lawyers that software developers are being advised to include the cooki…
> even to know whether they've visited the site before So uh, don't do that. You don't need to notify if you use cookies for required functionality like login sessions or remembering a functional setting. If you're tracking whether they're returning or not your activity is exactly the kind of behaviour the rule is covering because, in legal terms, it's skeezy as fuck.
It's a site where they log in and we store a cookie.
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#36I hope this goes through. Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive. It isn't a fair fight and the existence of infinite feeds is bad both for people and democracy. Regulating consumer products that cause harm to millions is nothing new.
[flagged]
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would anyone care about something like this ... Because it is a dangerous addiction [1] with recognised adverse effects on human health. Like sugar, tobacco, or drugs. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46959832
Lets do the nanny state! (As I get older, unironically. I want my productive worker bees to be drug free, addiction free, enjoying simple pleasures that do not put me at risk. They pay Social Security. Everything is nice and safe. Freedom? Yeah no thanks, get to work and pay your taxes.)
Thank you from talking about the Holy Freedom, my brother. Looking forward to enjoying further freedoms thanks to laws that protect me from behavior that makes me unfree and in need to constantly control me and my surroundings!
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#38Watch what governments do, not what they say.
This isn’t about addiction, it’s about censorship. If you limit the amount of time someone can spend getting information, and make it inconvenient with UI changes, it’s much harder to have embarrassing information spread to the masses.
Amazingly, the public will generally nod along anyway when they read governmental press releases and say “yes, yes, it’s for my safety.”
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#39I hope this goes through. Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive. It isn't a fair fight and the existence of infinite feeds is bad both for people and democracy. Regulating consumer products that cause harm to millions is nothing new.
> Trillion dollar companies are waging a war on our attention, using everything at their disposal to make these apps addictive.
Or you could just shut the phone off and/or not install the app. It's a simple solution, really, and one that is available at your disposal today at no cost.
Re: The EU moves to kill infinite scrolling
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would anyone care about something like this ... Because it is a dangerous addiction [1] with recognised adverse effects on human health. Like sugar, tobacco, or drugs. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46959832
Lets do the nanny state! (As I get older, unironically. I want my productive worker bees to be drug free, addiction free, enjoying simple pleasures that do not put me at risk. They pay Social Security. Everything is nice and safe. Freedom? Yeah no thanks, get to work and pay your taxes.)
I mean, lets do the opposite where a large corporation gets people intentionally addicted to drugs and then bilks them for every penny they have until they are husks. Remember, free market comes first!