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

Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#81

Post by IAmBroom »

dylan604 wrote: post #61
stickfigure wrote: post #47

Here's my proposal: * Let websites do whatever they want with cookies/local storage. * Let browsers delete them as often as they want. * Make other kinds of fingerprinting illegal.

> * Make other kinds of fingerprinting illegal. Speeding is illegal. Controlled substances are illegal. Murder is illegal. Embezzlement is illegal. Driving in a school zone while using a mobile device is illegal. Has the legality stopped any of it?

False dichotomy. Correct question: Has legality hindered any of it?

(Yes.)

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#82

Post by IAmBroom »

IlikeKitties wrote: post #46
Devasta wrote: post #34

Just ban individually targeted advertising and be done with it.

When the Digital Services/Markets Act was written this was actually considered. But there's also companies that surveil your browsing data and sell that for other purposes not just advertisement. Market Research and such. I'd have been for a blanket ban though. Sadly, this is mostly a matter of not enforcing the GDPR enough. Things such as "data minimization" and the erosion of "technically necessary" already should…

> But there's also companies that surveil your browsing data and sell that for other purposes not just advertisement. Market Research and such.

Market research is only "not just advertisement" by an artificial distinction. Walmart isn't preparing data for a non-profit research group's benefit.

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#83

Post by dylan604 »

IAmBroom wrote: post #81
dylan604 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Make other kinds of fingerprinting illegal. Speeding is illegal. Controlled substances are illegal. Murder is illegal. Embezzlement is illegal. Driving in a school zone while using a mobile device is illegal. Has the legality stopped any of it?

False dichotomy. Correct question: Has legality hindered any of it? (Yes.)

Hindered, but not eliminated. It is not a panacea. As long as people are willing to flaunt laws, laws are not the ultimate solution. The main reason here is that your laws are regional. Someone operating outside the jurisdiction of said law feels not obligation to obey said law, nor feel fear of punishment of said law.

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#85

Post by troupo »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #33
mkmk3 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False dichotomy, just advertise based on the content of the site without spying on people

Untargeted pay less than 90% of targeted ones generally. And there's not a lot of companies that can handle a 90% drop in revenue. The real solution would be to make users pay for the content, but charging for something that users used to get for "free" is also essentially impossible.

> Untargeted pay less than 90% of targeted ones generally.

I'd like to see the source of that claim.

E.g. this particular study claims almost the exact opposite: "Targeted ads need to be 100% to 700% more efficient than regular ads to be as profitable": https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016781162...

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#86

Post by troupo »

naIak wrote: post #8
avmich wrote: post #4

> This is not a real choice made by citizens This is something which courts should consider more about other things, such as EULA and Terms and Conditions. Same reasons.

The choice citizens would make every single time is to see the website without ads. Of course, publishers aren’t happy about that, since they would have to close shop. Maybe the EC should consider both sides of the equation.

> Maybe the EC should consider both sides of the equation.

They literally did. With GDPR. The poor struggling advertisers came up with the cookie banners they blamed on the EU.

Oh no, cried the publishers. How can we ever live without storing all of user data for a decade or more? https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1817122117093056541

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#87

Post by gruturo »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #33
mkmk3 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False dichotomy, just advertise based on the content of the site without spying on people

Untargeted pay less than 90% of targeted ones generally. And there's not a lot of companies that can handle a 90% drop in revenue. The real solution would be to make users pay for the content, but charging for something that users used to get for "free" is also essentially impossible.

> Untargeted pay less than 90% of targeted ones generally.

This could well be true. Unless targeted ads are just flat out banned, at which point the profitability of untargeted ones will rise, as the air (user attention, available space in web pages) is no longer being sucked out of the room by targeted ones.

Also - if by untargeted you mean completely randomly chosen ones, there absolutely is a happy medium - choose them based on the content of the page (I'm browsing for baby wipes and formula? Show me ads for strollers and child car seats, and maybe earplugs and some gift ideas for infants, not for motor oil or landscaping or circular saws). I don't buy the excuse that they are so much less effective - especially if the personally targeted ones are out of the picture.

As a huge bonus, they are comparatively trivial to implement and would provide a way out of the current monopoly were only Google, Facebook and a handful of other "know" what to show you and everyone must make these few greedy incumbents even richer by advertising through them. This would also help fragment what information exists about your habits, so even actors determined to break the law would get less advantages by doing so.

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#88

Post by gruturo »

zzzeek wrote: post #12

yes. everyone install Cookie Auto Delete. the problem is a plugin like that would take out entire industries because it would basically end anonymous tracking cookies.

An outcome I'm entirely fine with. Those industries are _not_ divinely entitled to fabulous wealth by violating one's privacy. I won't shed a tear if they don't survive once they are blocked from spying.

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#89

Post by bsimpson »

naIak wrote: post #8
avmich wrote: post #4

> This is not a real choice made by citizens This is something which courts should consider more about other things, such as EULA and Terms and Conditions. Same reasons.

The choice citizens would make every single time is to see the website without ads. Of course, publishers aren’t happy about that, since they would have to close shop. Maybe the EC should consider both sides of the equation.

I make six figures, have read The Verge almost every day since it launched, and I have not yet bought a membership to pass their new paywall.

The internet made information a commodity, and how we collectively pay for that information is still an open question 3 decades in.

It's easy to say people want content "without ads," but there are also plenty who don't want to buy a membership to every single provider either.

Re: Europe's cookie nightmare is crumbling. EC wants preference at browser level

#90

Post by Thorrez »

elric wrote: post #16

Much like the current cookie banner shitshow, a "centrally configured" setting which "websites must respect" will accomplish nothing. There is no consent, informed or otherwise. Advertisers and their ilk are still hoovering up all the data they can, with or without cookies or consent. Locking up a few people who don't respect their users' privacy would be a much more effective way of achieving actual results. AFAIK n…

You can't lock people up if they're not doing anything illegal. The first step is to write a law making what they're doing illegal. Then if they keep doing it, you'll be able to lock them up.
Post reply on HN