331–340 of 529 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bullshit. There’s no need to track every visitor. Just stop tracking and you don’t need a cookie banner. The only mistake EU policymakers made was underestimating how willing companies were to deface their websites.
"Every time you visit the websites managed by the European Commission, you will be prompted to accept or refuse cookies." https://european-union.europa.eu/cookies_en
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's an example of malicious compliance by some, and herd mentality by others. I had a discussion with my CFO about removing the cookie banner from our website (because we don't set any tracking cookies, and cookies for things like login are exempted) and he said "yeah, but it makes the site seem less legitimate.
No one is tanking UX to stick it to the EU. It would be better for them to simply not piss off their users. They are covering their ass. The obvious conclusion is that when you try to regulate something like this you arent going to get the behavior you want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's an example of malicious compliance by some, and herd mentality by others. I had a discussion with my CFO about removing the cookie banner from our website (because we don't set any tracking cookies, and cookies for things like login are exempted) and he said "yeah, but it makes the site seem less legitimate.
No one is tanking UX to stick it to the EU. It would be better for them to simply not piss off their users. They are covering their ass. The obvious conclusion is that when you try to regulate something like this you arent going to get the behavior you want.
It's trivial to make a site that doesn't need a cookie banner: don't set any cookies. Modern web devs have probably forgotten, but this is actually the default behavior. Cookies don't get set unless you do something to make it happen.
And cookies that you actually need for functionality don't need a banner either. If you're setting a session cookie for logged in users so they stay logged in when navigating between pages, you don't need one.
Why, then, does practically every site in existence now have one? Because they set unnecessary cookies. Because they choose to set unnecessary cookies in order to track you for purposes that are not necessary to the actual functionality of the site.
Every single cookie banner you see is a big sign that says, "We value our ability to track you for marketing purposes more than we value your time."
Apparently they're willing to say that. I still see it as a win. No tracking and no banners would be ideal, but at least the regulation forces them to be honest and up front about what they're doing. I'd rather have tracking and cookie banners announcing it than tracking with zero indication of tracking.
No endless scroll? What the hell am I supposed do I do with my mouse wheel?? Useless!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Plus, isn't this website undissmissably "better in the app" after a few minutes of attempting to use it on a phone? Where's that at? This is the most annoying thing on the internet. There’s a site I’d like to use, but “try the app” takes up the entire page (and appears to be impossible to dismiss?). Actually, is there a way to permanently request the desktop site for all future visits to a domain on iOS? There is n…
And don’t ever save the user’s “no” for next time. We need to needle them to use the app EVERY SINGLE TIME the visitor the website. I wonder sometimes how the team doing the website feels about being treated as second class. Or if it’s the same team and they have to hold their noses to work on it. The third dumbest smart person I had to work with obviously hated HTML and kept trying to get us to use a DSL instead. At…
The cookie thing, I assume it's EU-only, is an example of the EU policy making process being fundamentally broken in some way. If you create a flawed policy and don't fix it many years after it's very visibly obvious that it's a bad policy, something is really wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are not incompetent in general. Most stuff works pretty well in Europe and better than in most of the world. We just focus on the bad regulations
>Most stuff works pretty well in Europe Bold thing to say. t. European
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do Not Track was the right implementation (browser-based, activate only once) and it was sabotaged by ad peddlers. It is bad policy that has been reached after every better alternative was rejected.
Do not track has been used by ad companies to track users, it’s one of the datapoints that can be used to identify your fingerprint
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t use a bunch of unnecessary tracking cookies? Completely eliminates the need for a cookie permission bar.
The law does not say 'tracking'. It says 'strictly necessary'. If you remember the user's light/dark theme preference in a cookie, that requires notification. (Or rather, what it requires in practice is that you hire a Highly Paid Consultant.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's silly to blame the individual who doesn't have the authority or power at the business making these choices.
Unsure if you are saying there is no collective responsibility or think it is time to bring out the pitchforks?