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

Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

amazingcto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 662 posts

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#91

Post by boxed »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #51

Hate this way of thinking where the government (with seemingly good intentions) tries to stop something but leaves a loophole where all our lives are made more tedious and then people defend it saying the companies should just not do it, well we needed the law in the first place so it's a bit silly thinking to suggest they stop doing it after the law, no?. If the cookie law was written properly then it would have jus…

The law isn't that bad actually, just that the courts have been very slow. The dark UI patterns are actually illegal and have been judged so in court now. This realization just has to trickle down to the companies writing these cookie banners.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#93

Post by crabmusket »

isodev wrote: post #48
SuperNinKenDo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, completely foreseeable.

As a reminder, it's the same people in tech we're trusting to build things like chat bots, "AI", cars that try to drive themselves and rockets that try to land themselves... etc. You have to admit that if these same people can't be trusted to follow a simple "do not track" directive, humanity is in big trouble.

I mean, humanity is and always has been in big trouble. That's why history is full of disasters, mass death etc.

But I don't think it's that developers "can't" follow a DNT cookie. It's that they won't because it doesn't benefit their employer's financial interests.

Making a rocket that lands, on the other hand, does directly correspond to SpaceX's financial interests.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#94

Post by piva00 »

aurareturn wrote: post #78
nolok wrote: post #17

Imagine a market in which companies charge a lot of hidden fees behind their customers' back, and users are not happy when they realize after the fact. The law is updated to say you are not allowed to charge the user a fee unless you tell him in advance. Companies with tons of hidden fees decide to keep them but force you to read all the fees on every page of the menu before you can see the rest of the text, in the m…

Using your analogy, I think what ends up happening is that even companies that don't collect hidden fees will put up a banner just in case. Not only that, I'm not an EU citizen and I'm not browsing websites based in EU but I'm still bombarded with cookie banners non-stop.

> Not only that, I'm not an EU citizen and I'm not browsing websites based in EU but I'm still bombarded with cookie banners non-stop.

Again, that's the fault of the companies putting those up, they could make it opt-in to collect your data, they could just put a small notice on the footer with 2 simples links "Accept all/Reject all". But they chose, they decided to pester you with those banners as annoyingly as possible to make you have exactly the reaction you're having.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#95

Post by K0nserv »

JimDabell wrote: post #43

Yes there is. More specifically, it’s the Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive 2002/58/EC, which each member state adjusts their own laws to follow. It’s published here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... The relevant part: > Article 5 > Confidentiality of the communications > 3. Member States shall ensure that the storing of information, or the gaining of access to information…

This doesn't require a specific implementation just that informed consent is given. This could be implemented as a web standard alá Apple's ATT(App Tracking Transparency). There's nothing preventing the industry from creating such a standard, obviating cookie banners in the process. This would not only be a win for users, who could express their overall position on consent as a browser setting, but also save thousands of developer hours for website.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#97

Post by loftsy »

isodev wrote: post #10
ianlevesque wrote: post #2

The funny thing about legislation is that you're responsible for the unintended consequences of your laws too.

You mean the EU should have foreseen that people in tech have no conscience and sensitivity for right or wrong?

It's not enough to write a law on principles alone. It must be clear and practical to comply and clear how it will be enforced. The EU should not have created a situation where the most practical solution for 1000's of companies is a cookie banner.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#98

Post by crabmusket »

arbuge wrote: post #89

"Companies could easily avoid any cookie banner. Just don’t track." It seems like a point dear to the author's heart, given the way he highlights this and puts it in bold at the top of the article. But while it sounds good on the surface, it doesn't take much digging to show it's silly. If you store any kind of data about a visitor to make their life more convenient, is that tracking? Shopping carts? Notification pre…

Shopping carts and notification preferences don't require a consent banner.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#99

Post by iainmerrick »

squigz wrote: post #50
poszlem wrote: post #27

Putting up a wall in the middle of a busy street and then getting upset when people find ways around it doesn't make sense. The solution is either to remove the wall or ensure it cannot be bypassed. Right now, it's just irritating for the average person and slightly inconveniencing those who actually break the rules. This is the same situation with the cookie banner regulations. If the goal is to eliminate tracking,…

Since this is around the 5th time this sentiment has been expressed in this thread, I have to ask... are cookie banners really so frustrating? Oh no, gotta click one, maybe 2, more buttons...

If you want to click “no” it’s often dozens of clicks (e.g. to explicitly disable each “trusted partner” with “legitimate interest”) alongside constant attempts to trick you into clicking “yes” accidentally.

Re: Dear Paul Graham, there is no cookie banner law

#100

Post by ZiiS »

Whilst, I am very opposed to tracking; especially covert. I do believe the cookie law is bad. Fundamentally, websites can not store content on your computer without your consent. Your "User Agent" is what stores cookies; it is usually a piece of open source software fully in your control capable of only storing them based on any policy you like, including asking you for each site. Whilst it would be nice for all sites to set an "Evil Bit" telling you which cookies are functional and which are for Adversing tracking, this is un-policable.
Post reply on HN