4 ms·

What I don't like about the GDPR is how it handled cookies. We could have much tighter control and explicit consent at the browser level, which makes sense beca

What I don't like about the GDPR is how it handled cookies. We could have much tighter control and explicit consent at the browser level, which makes sense because it's a browser feature. Instead of something useful like that, we have annoying popups on millions of websites.

spongeb00b 7y ago
As someone who has had to both communicate to clients what the rulings mean, and also implement these popups, I totally agree... (and I'm sorry for the the popups)
TomJansen 7y ago
This. We really need a cookie consent at the browser level, just like browser ask for location/webcam access etc.
lazyjones 7y ago
Consent at the browser level could be implemented in a consumer-friendly way by browser makers. It isn't and enforcing it with laws is stupid (and will lead to similar negative results as with GDPR). Ask your browser maker to fix this, but don't bother asking Google.
M2Ys4U 7y ago
That is not because of the GDPR. Cookies (or, more specifically, data stored on end-user's devices) falls under the ePrivacy Directive from 2002(!) The only real change that the GDPR has made to this framework is the definition of "consent".
drusepth 7y ago
I wish we could at least get a browser-level setting to accept/decline all the cookie popups, but AFAIK there's no normalization across them that would make interacting with them in a general sense easy/possible. Why didn't we just use the cookie settings we already had in browsers, again?
Nextgrid 7y ago
The cookie thing is a myth most likely perpetuated by the cancerous advertising/marketing industry in an attempt to make the regulation look more annoying than it is. Cookies for strictly necessary technical reasons (like a session cookie set when you log in) or those that contain non-identifying information like language or font size do not require disclosure or consent. Oh the other hand, any tracking technology that collects personal information (whether cookies, local storage, server logs or browser fingerprinting) for non strictly necessary purposes (like analytics, A/B testing or conversion tracking) needs explicit, opt-in consent, and as far as I know personal information includes IP addresses or anything that can be used to identify someone uniquely with reasonable accuracy (so browser fingerprints fall in this category too). When consent is requested, it should freely given, so if saying yes is easier than saying no (which often requires unticking hundreds of checkboxes one by one or waiting 30 seconds for a fake "we are applying your ad preferences") then that consent is considered invalid and you may as well just not ask for it in the first place because you're in breach of the regulation anyway, but at least you wouldn't be annoying your users.

spongeb00b 7y ago

As someone who has had to both communicate to clients what the rulings mean, and also implement these popups, I totally agree... (and I'm sorry for the the popups)

TomJansen 7y ago

This. We really need a cookie consent at the browser level, just like browser ask for location/webcam access etc.

lazyjones 7y ago

Consent at the browser level could be implemented in a consumer-friendly way by browser makers. It isn't and enforcing it with laws is stupid (and will lead to similar negative results as with GDPR). Ask your browser maker to fix this, but don't bother asking Google.

M2Ys4U 7y ago

That is not because of the GDPR. Cookies (or, more specifically, data stored on end-user's devices) falls under the ePrivacy Directive from 2002(!) The only real change that the GDPR has made to this framework is the definition of "consent".

drusepth 7y ago

I wish we could at least get a browser-level setting to accept/decline all the cookie popups, but AFAIK there's no normalization across them that would make interacting with them in a general sense easy/possible. Why didn't we just use the cookie settings we already had in browsers, again?

Nextgrid 7y ago

The cookie thing is a myth most likely perpetuated by the cancerous advertising/marketing industry in an attempt to make the regulation look more annoying than it is. Cookies for strictly necessary technical reasons (like a session cookie set when you log in) or those that contain non-identifying information like language or font size do not require disclosure or consent. Oh the other hand, any tracking technology that collects personal information (whether cookies, local storage, server logs or browser fingerprinting) for non strictly necessary purposes (like analytics, A/B testing or conversion tracking) needs explicit, opt-in consent, and as far as I know personal information includes IP addresses or anything that can be used to identify someone uniquely with reasonable accuracy (so browser fingerprints fall in this category too). When consent is requested, it should freely given, so if saying yes is easier than saying no (which often requires unticking hundreds of checkboxes one by one or waiting 30 seconds for a fake "we are applying your ad preferences") then that consent is considered invalid and you may as well just not ask for it in the first place because you're in breach of the regulation anyway, but at least you wouldn't be annoying your users.