4 ms·

Those businesses seem to all be doing fine. They just implemented one of those annoying pop ups that you have to agree to before you can see their site, and the

Those businesses seem to all be doing fine. They just implemented one of those annoying pop ups that you have to agree to before you can see their site, and they’re still doing all the same things with your data. But with your “permission” now. All the other businesses, though, the ones who were never planning to do anything bad with your data. Those ones still all had to do a bunch of work and show that same stupid notice that drives their customers away. And they’re a lot less able to defend themselves against the mean spirited user behaviour outlined in the article. And for added fun, the eu now knows that it can pass silly laws like this as often as it likes, and the whole software world will need to devote a team to do a full sprint implementing another piece of user hostile code that doesn’t help their business. I’m not a fan.

raverbashing 7y ago
> though, the ones who were never planning to do anything bad with your data. Those ones still all had to do a bunch of work and show that same stupid notice If they're not planning to do anything bad with the data (that is, only use the data for what they need to work with the customer) they don't have to show the notice. It's that simple. RTFR
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  It was the same with old cookie law, btw. If you weren't using third-party trackers, you didn't have to put a cookie notice.
lone-commenter 7y ago
> another piece of user hostile code that doesn’t help their business. That's entirely their problem. Compliance with the law wouldn't require user-hostile "code" (I think you meant UI) if the business model wasn't user-hostile in the first place. It wouldn't hurt their business if their business was reasonable.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  If the business is user-hostile then why do the users use these services instead of paying for services that aren't "user-hostile"?
  - lone-commenter 7y ago
    True. Users prefer "free" services. I can imagine that some do prefer paid services, but the majority expects things on the Internet to fall from the sky. That said, I think your point doesn't prove those businesses good to have.
dmitriid 7y ago
The vast majority of those pop-up notices are not GDPR-compliant, JFYI. I really do hope the law enforcement comes after them.

raverbashing 7y ago

> though, the ones who were never planning to do anything bad with your data. Those ones still all had to do a bunch of work and show that same stupid notice If they're not planning to do anything bad with the data (that is, only use the data for what they need to work with the customer) they don't have to show the notice. It's that simple. RTFR

TeMPOraL 7y ago
It was the same with old cookie law, btw. If you weren't using third-party trackers, you didn't have to put a cookie notice.

lone-commenter 7y ago

> another piece of user hostile code that doesn’t help their business. That's entirely their problem. Compliance with the law wouldn't require user-hostile "code" (I think you meant UI) if the business model wasn't user-hostile in the first place. It wouldn't hurt their business if their business was reasonable.

Mirioron 7y ago
If the business is user-hostile then why do the users use these services instead of paying for services that aren't "user-hostile"?
- lone-commenter 7y ago
  True. Users prefer "free" services. I can imagine that some do prefer paid services, but the majority expects things on the Internet to fall from the sky. That said, I think your point doesn't prove those businesses good to have.

dmitriid 7y ago

The vast majority of those pop-up notices are not GDPR-compliant, JFYI. I really do hope the law enforcement comes after them.