801–810 of 979 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is just bad UI. It could have been better implemented, such as with a browser-side opt out setting, for instance. Similar to what we have for permissions, for instance.
Why do governments think they are experts in user interfaces or UX?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ahhhh, every time the same discussion 1. GDPR consent dialogs are not cookie popups, most things you see are GDPR consent dialogs 2. GDPR consent dialogs are only required if you share data, i.e. spy on the user 3. GDPR had from the get to go a bunch of exceptions, e.g. you don't need permission to store a same site cookie indicating that you opted out of tracking _iff_ you don't use it for tracking. Same for a lot o…
"Share data" !=== "spy on the user" Oauth, for example.
Legal bases for processing: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-6-gdpr/ Everyone knows part A because that's a catch-all. If the user requested something, it's better UX to use Part B. Parts C and F apply sometimes. You still have to follow the rest of the GDPR, like letting them delete it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this hypothetical scenario, why are you assuming in-app advertising would be any different from browser advertising? Re-read @phire’s comment above; the proposal was to get rid of targeted advertising that uses your personal data to make advertising decisions. I assumed that would apply to all advertising channels, including both web and in-app ads, otherwise you’d be right and it probably wouldn’t work.
Are you also going to ban websites that aren’t hosted by the US from being seen in the US that have advertising?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But I don’t speak Spanish and I’m in Florida…
Isn’t hearing some Spanish from time to time expected in Miami, whether you speak it or not? I expect to hear Spanish and I live nowhere near a coast… And you prefer that advertisers read through your posts/emails/history/everything to make ads targeted at you? If you don’t care about the risks of targeted advertising, and don’t agree with the EU’s decision to ban manipulative behavior, then the proposal we’re discus…
So what if I have a website based out of the counter and accept advertisements? Are you going to tell ISPs to block those foreign websites?
Let me tell you a little story. The state I live in just passed a law requiring all porn sites to verify age. Guess how many porn sites not based in the US ignored the law entirely? Guess how many who did folks the law can be viewed over a VPN? If you guessed “lesser than 100% between both, you would be wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you acting like this is something hypothetical? The Trump administration just cut funding for both NPR and PBS because they are “too woke” The same government who threatened to take ABC broadcast license because Kimmel made a joke about a dead podcaster
And I would argue that they have been able to do this because a small group of private individuals control the information networks and either desired that purpose or are ambivalent to their cause in it. The potential failure of the system because of the effect of the wrong choice in this matter is evidence in favor of my argument, not against it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do governments think they are experts in user interfaces or UX?
They don't. The GDPR doesn't mention any specific UX.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is talking about banning ads on sports shirts.
So what about sports shirts with ads shown on youtube streams?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a recency bias here. The Sp500 has outperformed the Stoxx600 every year for the last 5 years, except 2022. Cumulative returns are around 100% for the american index, vs 60% for the EU one.
Maybe the momentum of Stoxx600 will last the next 4 years? Or maybe the S&P500 will come crashing down soon? Who knows. The Shiller PE ratio is insanely high. At least the European market isn't completely overinvested in just 7 companies who are spending a lot of their money on the exact same thing, so it has that going for it.
Here's the actual statement from the European Comission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_... It's important to note they aren't creating laws against infinite scrolling , but are ruling against addictive design and pointing to infinite scrolling as an example of it. The wording here is fascinating, mainly because they're effectively acting as arbiters of "vibes". They point to certain feat…
Isn't this the standard EU way? First, they publish a statement, declaring what they want to see. 'Deal with addictive design', in this case. We've had 'Deal with the zillion different connectors on cell phones' in the past. It is now up to the industry to do this, in whatever way they see fit. If this happens, no law will be written. However, if the industry doesn't deal with it adequately, Laws will Follow, and the…
Is there a law against it?