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

Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

legiscope.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 395 posts

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#91

Post by Cthulhu_ »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #34
diggan wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's not that black and white. If you follow the regulation too loosely, you get warnings. If you then ignore the problem, you'd get bigger problems. But no one is gonna put a "10% of global turnover" as a fine immediately.

> But no one is gonna put a "10% of global turnover" as a fine immediately. You're dealing with the EU. Stupidly high fines happen weekly.

After multiple warnings and lawsuits, sure. Conform to the rules if you don't want the fines. But these companies are so big and rich, they'd rather break the rules and risk a fine than give up on their sweet data. And even if they get sued, they have armies of lawyers - still cheaper to spend millions on lawyers than pay a hundreds of millions fine.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#92

Post by diggan »

ffsm8 wrote: post #87
legitster wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> never seem to blame the web companies for doing the naughty things on their websites Part of the problem is that the law didn't seek to distinguish between tame first-party cookies and the really naughty third-party cookies so the burden is equal regardless of how malicious the service is. > For the company, it's a one time JIRA ticket for a junior software engineer to code up a banner. This is actually not true. T…

It did though? You don't need a banner for actually legitimate use (session Cookie, settings, etc) The things they're calling legitimate use just isn't, which is why they need banners.

I keep seeing this misinformation going around, and it has been going around since almost day 1 of when the directive became known. I'm not sure where it's coming from, or who initially thought it worked like that, but judging by the comments in this submission it seems like a ton of people are very misinformed about how these things actually work.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#93

Post by Cthulhu_ »

tonymet wrote: post #9

This destroyed the world wide web, which was the major driver of the internet as a consumer application. I'm referring to the experience of intelligent & creative publishers sharing content openly on the web. This did far more to destroy the world wide web than ads or tracking

Ads/tracking didn't destroy the web per se - besides the performance impact - but did/do destroy people's privacy.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#94

Post by Rygian »

legitster wrote: post #72
ryandrake wrote: post #55

People blame the cookie banners themselves or the legislation that "made them necessary" but somehow never seem to blame the web companies for doing the naughty things on their websites that make them subject to the law. The "cookie banner problem" exists because it's primarily end users that are shouldering the burden of them, and not the companies. For the company, it's a one time JIRA ticket for a junior software…

> never seem to blame the web companies for doing the naughty things on their websites Part of the problem is that the law didn't seek to distinguish between tame first-party cookies and the really naughty third-party cookies so the burden is equal regardless of how malicious the service is. > For the company, it's a one time JIRA ticket for a junior software engineer to code up a banner. This is actually not true. T…

The cookie banner has nothing to do with first -party vs third-party.

The cookie banner is required depending on the purpose of the cookies, not the party setting them.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#95

Post by deprecative »

seeknotfind wrote: post #73
serial_dev wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I appreciate your workarounds, the issue is not fixed. Almost everyone is going to keep clicking these stupid banners. It’s not okay, it’s not fixed until the rules are adjusted and we have less tracking and’s less pointless banners.

So many pop-ups these days, for every little thing. Tracking. OS permissions. Browser permissions. Take a survey. Speak to our AI assistant. Do you agree to this. Donate. Sign up. Pay. So many clicks. Used to be viruses, but we have the same result with our complexity.

It's not complex. It's simple. It's greed. It's absolutely ridiculous that we as a species put up with all of this nonsense because we have a faulty foundational understanding of what is and should be normal. The brain rot that we've subjected ourselves to is absolutely ludicrous.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#96

Post by osm3000 »

I can't believe any of this made a difference in privacy. There is ZERO chance that the law can be enforced here. I've worked in few startups in Europe, no one understand their obligation, let alone the consequences from third party services.

This whole cookie banners, and GDPR in general, is as good as literature.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#97

Post by IshKebab »

Darkskiez wrote: post #15

https://www.amazingcto.com/cookie-banners-are-not-needed/

That is dumb. The EU already knew this was the likely outcome because we already had stupid cookie warnings from the previous law.

Regulation exists in the real world, not in some fantasy land where companies do what you want.

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#98

Post by freeone3000 »

serial_dev wrote: post #67
coldpie wrote: post #6

Hop into your uBlock Origin settings and enable the Cookie Banner filters. Fixed. Enable the Annoyances filters too, while you're in there. If you're on iOS, the Kill Sticky bookmarklet does a decent job of cleaning these up without breaking most sites: https://www.smokingonabike.com/2024/01/20/take-back-your-web...

While I appreciate your workarounds, the issue is not fixed. Almost everyone is going to keep clicking these stupid banners. It’s not okay, it’s not fixed until the rules are adjusted and we have less tracking and’s less pointless banners.

So remove the consent exception against tracking? Simply make it illegal, banner or no?

Re: Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

#99

Post by ryandrake »

legitster wrote: post #72
ryandrake wrote: post #55

People blame the cookie banners themselves or the legislation that "made them necessary" but somehow never seem to blame the web companies for doing the naughty things on their websites that make them subject to the law. The "cookie banner problem" exists because it's primarily end users that are shouldering the burden of them, and not the companies. For the company, it's a one time JIRA ticket for a junior software…

> never seem to blame the web companies for doing the naughty things on their websites Part of the problem is that the law didn't seek to distinguish between tame first-party cookies and the really naughty third-party cookies so the burden is equal regardless of how malicious the service is. > For the company, it's a one time JIRA ticket for a junior software engineer to code up a banner. This is actually not true. T…

> Part of the problem is that the law didn't seek to distinguish between tame first-party tokens and the really naughty third-party tokens

Maybe I'm an outlier, but ideally I don't want them collecting any "tokens" without my consent. I don't care if they're first party or third party or birthday party. I should be able to browse web sites in peace without some company collecting anything. If the web site doesn't work exactly the way I'd expect because I did not provide that consent, then that's on me.

Post reply on HN