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

Kill The Cookie Banner

killthecookiebanner.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 621 posts

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#61

Post by tysilva »

convolvatron wrote: post #20
tysilva wrote: post #18

Wow, finally. This would be a major quality of life update for browsing the web. As others have stated, not all sites merit the same preferences. Hopefully they can adapt a middleground of default settings with the ability to customize site by site.

under what circumstances as user would I want to explicitly agree to have my browsing history sent to tens or hundreds of third party tracking aggregators?

I don't disagree. The ideal state here is really layers of customation for the defaults. Options like reject all, or strictly necessary would be at the forefront. And then it's really up to the individual how they want to proceed when those options are not available.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#62

Post by jarofgreen »

maccard wrote: post #38
alt227 wrote: post #34

I still don't get why every website has a cookie banner by default. I am data controller for several companies and have lots of exposure to GDPR. All my websites have no cookie banner, as they are not required. I guess that most companies just chuck it up there as a default so they dont have to read the law, or maybe they are all actually harvesting and selling personal data and therefore require cookies? Who knows.

I’ve made a few sites for work that aren’t our primary focus. The sites used cookies for login and for “required purposes” (storing in progress state). We did all the tracking on the backend, no cookies or client side trackers. On our go-live form there’s a question “do you use cookies” and it’s yes/no. If you say yes legal block the site from going live without the pre approved cookie banner…

> We did all the tracking on the backend

Just checking, you do know that still counts as tracking and may fall under GDPR rules? GDPR was never just about cookies.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#63

Post by aspbee555 »

mike_hock wrote: post #37
Phemist wrote: post #22

> Tired of misleading cookie banners? The EU Commission has finally proposed a solution: set your privacy preferences in the browser once, and never see another banner. So lawmakers do know how to make legally binding preferences based on device settings? What a crazy innovation.. now if only parents were given these options to indicate their child is using a device.. we could do away with all this Online Safety Act…

Don't fall for the "we are just stupid" propaganda, which is used constantly by governments acting in bad faith. Browsers already had settings for deleting cookies. There was never a reason for banners whose only function was pulling the ladder up from smaller competitors and concentrating power in the hands of an oligopoly that could siphon data directly from the OS. This coupled with a law mandating ISPs provide a…

changing IP is not really enough for privacy, there is many ways to fingerprint your machine/browser and uniquely identify you across networks

https://creepjs.org/checker

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#64

Post by tete »

No, please don't!

It's great. The current law forces people that don't give a shit about user privacy to have a banner (or any other way of asking for consent first) while giving everyone that cares and everyone not wanting to spy on their visitor a free pass.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#65

Post by BiteCode_dev »

tgv wrote: post #36
Phemist wrote: post #22

> Tired of misleading cookie banners? The EU Commission has finally proposed a solution: set your privacy preferences in the browser once, and never see another banner. So lawmakers do know how to make legally binding preferences based on device settings? What a crazy innovation.. now if only parents were given these options to indicate their child is using a device.. we could do away with all this Online Safety Act…

The problem there is that parent's won't know how to do it, or won't care. Many can hardly operate the most user-friendly phone, let alone manage accounts. The online safety acts and its EU counterparts are somewhat risky, but nobody wants the mention the only proper alternative: a total ban on "social media." Not just for kids, but for everyone. Or a ban on smart phones, that would work too, at least short term. But…

A child can still access knives if the parents don't care.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#66

Post by SoftTalker »

broken-kebab wrote: post #39
tgv wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem there is that parent's won't know how to do it, or won't care. Many can hardly operate the most user-friendly phone, let alone manage accounts. The online safety acts and its EU counterparts are somewhat risky, but nobody wants the mention the only proper alternative: a total ban on "social media." Not just for kids, but for everyone. Or a ban on smart phones, that would work too, at least short term. But…

It's ok if parents won't care. It's a choice too.

Yes, you can't make parents care, but make it easy for the ones who do, and you'll also pick up some number of those who care but only if it's not too difficult. There's no reason a parent should have to set permissions separately in 10 differents apps on a child's device.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#67

Post by kuerbel »

alt227 wrote: post #34

I still don't get why every website has a cookie banner by default. I am data controller for several companies and have lots of exposure to GDPR. All my websites have no cookie banner, as they are not required. I guess that most companies just chuck it up there as a default so they dont have to read the law, or maybe they are all actually harvesting and selling personal data and therefore require cookies? Who knows.

If you use social media pixels, ad tracking, or performance analytics tools like Google Analytics a cookie banner and consent is required. If not, then not.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#68

Post by fmbb »

alt227 wrote: post #51
convolvatron wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

under what circumstances as user would I want to explicitly agree to have my browsing history sent to tens or hundreds of third party tracking aggregators?

Ask that question to the 99% of people who click 'Allow All' on cookie banners.

Its the biggest button.

They did not read the text to agree.

It was the fastest way to get the banner to go away. Sometimes they force you to confirm multiple times if you click ”none” or ”minimal”.

Re: Kill The Cookie Banner

#70

Post by tete »

drnick1 wrote: post #43

uBlock Origin with all "annoyance" filters enabled. I haven't seen a cookie banner in years. Another good one to have the "hide Youtube shorts" filter, featured on HN a while back.

There is Consent-O-Matic.

Also I wanna know when websites don't give a shit about my privacy and therefor have to show a cookie banner. While theoretically not consenting should mean not collecting blocking it altogether and modifying page content might mean "all bets are off". If the website expects you to have made a decision that might wrongly consider it consent.

Consent-O-Matic says "I don't consent".

Post reply on HN