7 ms·

They are not mandatory, it's a choice by the site owner to include them. They are only mandatory if you include tracking features that track users across the we

They are not mandatory, it's a choice by the site owner to include them. They are only mandatory if you include tracking features that track users across the web (= ads and Google analytics).

mfontani 6y ago
One can include ads and analytics without consent being granted - they're "just" restricted to a method of delivering ads and performing analytics which don't track the user. IANAL, mind you - but that's how we implemented it - you're opting-in to the ads that target you and analytics which track you, or you get the non-tracking/non-targeting ads and analytics.
- skrtskrt 6y ago
  What are some good non-tracking & non-intrusive ad providers? I've wondered about one day being able to put a few "ethical" ads on a blog site.
  - mfontani 6y ago
    I wouldn't say "ethical", but even Google's pubads can do non-tracking. For pubads, look into "setCookieOptions(1)" and "setRequestNonPersonalizedAds(1)" for a good start on the matter. It _can_ be done.
  - nicbou 6y ago
    Affiliate marketing is the best way to go. You have full control on how you advertise products. For my website [1], I have build close relationships with local experts. They provide services my readers need, and I know they can be trusted. I get a commission from resulting sales. I like that model because advertisers have zero access to or control over the readers' data. Unfortunately, it's simply not applicable to all websites. - [1] https://allaboutberlin.com/ https://allaboutberlin.com/
  - bartread 6y ago
    You don't need to look far. You can simply tell Adsense[1] to serve up non-personalised ads: (adsbygoogle=window.adsbygoogle || []).requestNonPersonalizedAds = true; If you do this you don't even need to check for consent since you're not tracking the user or storing any PII. In my case this is what I call if the user doesn't accept advertising cookies, but there's no reason you can't disable them completely on your site if that's what you'd like. You also have pretty tight control over the categories of ad that Adsense can display, and you can even go as far as to review individual adverts. I've booted a couple of ads that I found to be unethical/distasteful from my site using the review feature in Adsense. The only issue with Adsense is that there are a gazillion ads it might show on your site, so I'd recommend filtering out any categories you don't much like first, and then reviewing ads sorted by popularity/impressions in descending order, otherwise you'll quickly go mad. [1] Obviously not an option if you absolutely don't want to do business with Google.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      > If you do this you don't even need to check for consent since you're not tracking the user or storing any PII. Google seems to disagree [1]: Non-personalized ads are targeted using contextual information rather than the past behavior of a user. Although these ads don’t use cookies for ads personalization, they do use cookies to allow for frequency capping, aggregated ad reporting, and to combat fraud and abuse. Consent is therefore required to use cookies for those purposes from users in countries to which the EU ePrivacy Directive’s cookie provisions apply. What's not clear from Google's documentation, but what I assume, is that they also do not use the info about the context & visitor to serve them personalized ads on other websites. [1] https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/7670013 https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/7670013
      - mfontani 6y ago
        Well, sure - you can still send some signals to see ads that are relevant to the _content_ as opposed to the _viewer_. Example: you're seeing an article about devops and you get an ad about AWS instead of an ad that has followed you around from another website you visited previously. The cookie used for frequency capping is considered to be a "technical cookie" and has no bearing on privacy, best I can tell. The other types of cookies can be pretty much disabled at the point of calling the google tag, or enabled (along with more tracking/targeting ads) if the user consented to that.
nicbou 6y ago
> across the web That part is not necessary. They are mandatory if you collect any form of personal data without legitimate interest.
cwbrandsma 6y ago
Which means any website that does anything useful. That doesn't mean ads, but Google Analytics (or another comparable service) is just about everywhere these days.
- yoz-y 6y ago
  It doesn't have to be a modal popup either. If your default is truly "off" then you could have a banner on top or bottom or somewhere saying something like "please help us make the site better..." or whatever.
- kohtatsu 6y ago
  Google Analytics being everywhere is a at least an order of magnitude worse than the embedded like button spying.
  - TomMarius 6y ago
    I disagree. Facebook has much more power over advertising to their users (by personalizing the wall).
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      Facebook personalizes the Facebook wall. Google personalizes almost every other page you visit and mobile applications/games you use. Not sure how Facebook is more dangerous here.
      - TomMarius 6y ago
        No, it doesn't. I use adblock, as does a lot of other users. The FB wall is organized to my liking without any direct ads needed.
- ferzul 6y ago
  but that isn't intrinsic to useful services. it is possible to run a profitable bookstore or organise an event without tracking individual users.
adrr 6y ago
Or if you do Ab testing, or any e-commerce feature like a shopping cart. Internet is more than ad supported sites.
- noisem4ker 6y ago
  Both false. A/B testing is allowed and doesn't need opt-in if the A-or-B preference is only recorded in aggregate form and not tied to the user. Same for the purchasing scenario. In this case, you would be explicitly collecting personal data to fulfill the order.
  - tripzilch 6y ago
    Crazy how people whose job it is to build this crap, don't even know what the actual rules are. It's almost as if they just want to collect all the data on all the users forever without any oversight, by continuously rehashing bad and misunderstood versions of the GDPR and pretending it's hard and complex and vague.
- Jare 6y ago
  You don't have to assume your user wants to be A/B tracked, or wants to purchase anything. You can allow the user to enable them nicely and non-intrusively without a popup. You can ask the user intrusively when they actually initiate a purchasing action. Most sites choose do popup instead because (they think) it is more effective. So be it, but don't say it's "mandatory" or that "they are forced to".
- goto11 6y ago
  You don't have to warn the users for using a cookie for a shopping cart. That is considered basic functionality.
nsxwolf 6y ago
It's a choice so many site owners have made that the web is effectively ruined.
markdown 6y ago
I refuse to include them. I am not a citizen of an EU country and I don't give a rats arse what the EU thinks of my website. They aren't the boss of me.

They are not mandatory, it's a choice by the site owner to include them. They are only mandatory if you include tracking features that track users across the web (= ads and Google analytics).

mfontani 6y ago

One can include ads and analytics without consent being granted - they're "just" restricted to a method of delivering ads and performing analytics which don't track the user. IANAL, mind you - but that's how we implemented it - you're opting-in to the ads that target you and analytics which track you, or you get the non-tracking/non-targeting ads and analytics.

skrtskrt 6y ago
What are some good non-tracking & non-intrusive ad providers? I've wondered about one day being able to put a few "ethical" ads on a blog site.
- mfontani 6y ago
  I wouldn't say "ethical", but even Google's pubads can do non-tracking. For pubads, look into "setCookieOptions(1)" and "setRequestNonPersonalizedAds(1)" for a good start on the matter. It _can_ be done.
- nicbou 6y ago
  Affiliate marketing is the best way to go. You have full control on how you advertise products. For my website [1], I have build close relationships with local experts. They provide services my readers need, and I know they can be trusted. I get a commission from resulting sales. I like that model because advertisers have zero access to or control over the readers' data. Unfortunately, it's simply not applicable to all websites. - [1] https://allaboutberlin.com/ https://allaboutberlin.com/
- bartread 6y ago
  You don't need to look far. You can simply tell Adsense[1] to serve up non-personalised ads: (adsbygoogle=window.adsbygoogle || []).requestNonPersonalizedAds = true; If you do this you don't even need to check for consent since you're not tracking the user or storing any PII. In my case this is what I call if the user doesn't accept advertising cookies, but there's no reason you can't disable them completely on your site if that's what you'd like. You also have pretty tight control over the categories of ad that Adsense can display, and you can even go as far as to review individual adverts. I've booted a couple of ads that I found to be unethical/distasteful from my site using the review feature in Adsense. The only issue with Adsense is that there are a gazillion ads it might show on your site, so I'd recommend filtering out any categories you don't much like first, and then reviewing ads sorted by popularity/impressions in descending order, otherwise you'll quickly go mad. [1] Obviously not an option if you absolutely don't want to do business with Google.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > If you do this you don't even need to check for consent since you're not tracking the user or storing any PII. Google seems to disagree [1]: Non-personalized ads are targeted using contextual information rather than the past behavior of a user. Although these ads don’t use cookies for ads personalization, they do use cookies to allow for frequency capping, aggregated ad reporting, and to combat fraud and abuse. Consent is therefore required to use cookies for those purposes from users in countries to which the EU ePrivacy Directive’s cookie provisions apply. What's not clear from Google's documentation, but what I assume, is that they also do not use the info about the context & visitor to serve them personalized ads on other websites. [1] https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/7670013 https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/7670013
    - mfontani 6y ago
      Well, sure - you can still send some signals to see ads that are relevant to the _content_ as opposed to the _viewer_. Example: you're seeing an article about devops and you get an ad about AWS instead of an ad that has followed you around from another website you visited previously. The cookie used for frequency capping is considered to be a "technical cookie" and has no bearing on privacy, best I can tell. The other types of cookies can be pretty much disabled at the point of calling the google tag, or enabled (along with more tracking/targeting ads) if the user consented to that.

nicbou 6y ago

> across the web That part is not necessary. They are mandatory if you collect any form of personal data without legitimate interest.

cwbrandsma 6y ago

Which means any website that does anything useful. That doesn't mean ads, but Google Analytics (or another comparable service) is just about everywhere these days.

yoz-y 6y ago
It doesn't have to be a modal popup either. If your default is truly "off" then you could have a banner on top or bottom or somewhere saying something like "please help us make the site better..." or whatever.
kohtatsu 6y ago
Google Analytics being everywhere is a at least an order of magnitude worse than the embedded like button spying.
- TomMarius 6y ago
  I disagree. Facebook has much more power over advertising to their users (by personalizing the wall).
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    Facebook personalizes the Facebook wall. Google personalizes almost every other page you visit and mobile applications/games you use. Not sure how Facebook is more dangerous here.
    - TomMarius 6y ago
      No, it doesn't. I use adblock, as does a lot of other users. The FB wall is organized to my liking without any direct ads needed.
ferzul 6y ago
but that isn't intrinsic to useful services. it is possible to run a profitable bookstore or organise an event without tracking individual users.

adrr 6y ago

Or if you do Ab testing, or any e-commerce feature like a shopping cart. Internet is more than ad supported sites.

noisem4ker 6y ago
Both false. A/B testing is allowed and doesn't need opt-in if the A-or-B preference is only recorded in aggregate form and not tied to the user. Same for the purchasing scenario. In this case, you would be explicitly collecting personal data to fulfill the order.
- tripzilch 6y ago
  Crazy how people whose job it is to build this crap, don't even know what the actual rules are. It's almost as if they just want to collect all the data on all the users forever without any oversight, by continuously rehashing bad and misunderstood versions of the GDPR and pretending it's hard and complex and vague.
Jare 6y ago
You don't have to assume your user wants to be A/B tracked, or wants to purchase anything. You can allow the user to enable them nicely and non-intrusively without a popup. You can ask the user intrusively when they actually initiate a purchasing action. Most sites choose do popup instead because (they think) it is more effective. So be it, but don't say it's "mandatory" or that "they are forced to".
goto11 6y ago
You don't have to warn the users for using a cookie for a shopping cart. That is considered basic functionality.

nsxwolf 6y ago

It's a choice so many site owners have made that the web is effectively ruined.

markdown 6y ago

I refuse to include them. I am not a citizen of an EU country and I don't give a rats arse what the EU thinks of my website. They aren't the boss of me.