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

New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

dataprotectioncontrol.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 269 posts

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#251

Post by TheCoelacanth »

juloo wrote: post #8

Why do they still think we want tracking cookies ? The ad industry should prepare for a future with no tracking instead of trying to survive with ever shadier tricks, IMO. This won't work: - browsers other than Chrome will say "no tracking" by default, tracking companies won't like that - websites will ignore this, this will be known and people will be upset even more - more javascript when we want less

They don't.

They think if they keep badgering you enough you will eventually cave and say yes.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#252

Post by jjk166 »

rchaud wrote: post #200
jjk166 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is intellectually lazy. You can't just assume that the large numbers of people who hold a position you disagree with do so only because they have some secret bias. It's a position which is not falsifiable and which absolves oneself of having to think critically about their own position.

One man's 'intellectually lazy' is another man's 'educated guess'. Or as this community loves to say about others, "“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” There are plenty of people online playing devil's advocate because one day they too could be rich and they don't want the harsh yoke of government regulation holding them back. On HN, part of the…

Call it whatever you like, it's still a an unfalsifiable claim resting on fallacious reasoning.

As a general best practice, if you are convinced something is true, ask yourself "what evidence would someone have to show me to convince me this is not true" - if you can't think of something, there's a problem.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#253

Post by cratermoon »

quotemstr wrote: post #220
cratermoon wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what are the actual harms The kind of question can only be asked by someone who has never been abused by a domestic partner, never been on the wrong end of debt collectors, the law, disgruntled employees, doxxers, or other real and persistent threats that are enabled by the data collection and aggregation that is the foundation of interest targeting.

Do abusive domestic partners, debt collectors, random employees, or angry doxxers have access to targeted advertising interest data? The "harm" you're discussing is hypothetical and extremely unlikely. I'm asking for concrete examples.

40% of police officer families experience domestic violence: https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/09/police-...

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#254

Post by apple4ever »

411111111111111 wrote: post #154
leokennis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This exactly. This is also why I never feel "ashamed" when sites ask me to please disable my ad blocker because when I block ads they'll go out of business. Or why I'll always decline even "user respecting" ads on sites. We're fighting the ad and tracking industry here, the internet equivalent of a gang member with a shiv and a length of pipe. I'm not going to fight nicely. I'll deny you any chance and any method I g…

Just a small reminder for people using Firefox and ublock origin: you can remove almost all cookie prompts by enabling the annoyances filters in the addon settings

And on Safari use Hush!

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#255

Post by nickpp »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #169
nickpp wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why does the very gdpr.eu website have a cookie banner at the bottom of the page?! There is clearly no session or shopping cart going on.

Uh, are you asking why a site with that doesn't use cookies in a purely functional manner has a cookie banner? In any case, it's the usual reason: they have google tracking, and it seems like they embed content from other sides the easy way. You too can learn the answer to the mystery of why there is a consent banner by clicking the "Privacy policy" button, this one actually explains it clearly, like it was supposed…

Actually the unobtrusive cookie banner as implemented on that site is illegal under GDPR. Check out https://ico.org.uk/ for a correctly implemented popup with its dismal UX.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#256

Post by chopin »

labawi wrote: post #240
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> initial fine is much, much lower and companies have so long to dabble in wilful ignorance Another diluent: the maximum fine is practically the lesser of 2% and the NPV of business in that European country, or, expansively, in Europe. If you have little business in Europe, it’s cheaper in some cases to simply close shop.

I'm pretty certain an actual fine (not ceasing operations) has a limit of max(10M€, 2% worldwide revenue of previous year) and double if you're antithetical to GDPR. Also, it's per infringement and isn't a yearly free pass to continue once you're fined. Companies are not doing much because enforcement is lacking, and in case you get caught, most fines are in the neighborhood of reasonable rather than instant liquidat…

GDPR says:

> Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 10 000 000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 2 % of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher (emphasis mine).

As for the absolute sum, there is no limit.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#257

Post by chopin »

zeepzeep wrote: post #141
dmm wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love uMatrix but development on it has stopped so it won't receive bug fixes and it will probably stop working someday. I don't think I would recommend new users start using it. https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24532973

Yes true, but it's still working mostly and I don't have a real alternative. I want to switch to uBlock's Advanced mode which seems to do similar things, but I haven't yet.

The UI is much less clear on what is blocked or not compared to uMatrix. I definitely prefer the latter.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#258

Post by leokennis »

howaboutnope wrote: post #250
leokennis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This exactly. This is also why I never feel "ashamed" when sites ask me to please disable my ad blocker because when I block ads they'll go out of business. Or why I'll always decline even "user respecting" ads on sites. We're fighting the ad and tracking industry here, the internet equivalent of a gang member with a shiv and a length of pipe. I'm not going to fight nicely. I'll deny you any chance and any method I g…

> People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the w…

Saving this text. Very accurate.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#259

Post by MiddleEndian »

411111111111111 wrote: post #154
leokennis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This exactly. This is also why I never feel "ashamed" when sites ask me to please disable my ad blocker because when I block ads they'll go out of business. Or why I'll always decline even "user respecting" ads on sites. We're fighting the ad and tracking industry here, the internet equivalent of a gang member with a shiv and a length of pipe. I'm not going to fight nicely. I'll deny you any chance and any method I g…

Just a small reminder for people using Firefox and ublock origin: you can remove almost all cookie prompts by enabling the annoyances filters in the addon settings

You can also block all sorts of annoyances. Last year I added ##.ytp-pause-overlay to my list, now when I click to pause embedded youtube videos all the useless crap like "more videos" does not show up. I also tend to block any sort of mouseover modals that show up on sites, like profiles on forums or reddit.

Re: New browser signal could make cookie banners obsolete

#260

Post by rsj_hn »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #177
M2Ys4U wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privacy is a human right , and respecting it does not, in any way whatsoever, break the internet.

Specifically, Article 12 of the UDHR states: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human... Why isn't this Article at the forefront of any and all conversation re…

UDHR is not a binding law, it is a "declaration". An aspirational statement of common understanding made by bureaucrats in a big conference in 1948, and is one of many such "declarations". Thus trying to cite a certain passage of this 70 year old declaration as if it had legal force today in any country on earth is a pretty odd thing to do. A declaration isn't even a treaty, and of course a treaty needs to be ratified to be in effect. So not only has the UNDR not been ratified by anyone, it can't be ratified as it is not even a treaty to begin with.

Now some nations may have decide to take some of the principles in this declaration and turn them into laws. But you will find that there is great variance in the human rights laws today even between, say, Canada and the U.S., or Mexico and Japan.

The fact of the matter is human rights are a social construct and they very much differ on what society your are in and what that society has decided are the rights it will observe. Looking around, we find very different definitions and intepretations of rights all around the world.

Post reply on HN