3 ms·

Here's an example of a broken site: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/privacy-policy/en https://www.europarl.europa.eu/privacy-policy/en The only two cookie opti

Here's an example of a broken site: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/privacy-policy/en https://www.europarl.europa.eu/privacy-policy/en The only two cookie options are "Accept" or "More". But the More option is broken and just brings up the same cookie notice again and again on my browser. It drops cookies on the browser regardless of whether you choose to accept or not (search your cookies in the browser for europarl.europa.eu, you'll find the unique "atuserid" and "atidvisitor" analytics identifiers it has set to identify you). If that's the result on the EU Parliament's own website, on their privacy policy page, it's safe to say the EU doesn't actually care about privacy.

Mirioron 6y ago
Maybe all these websites are simply taking the EU Parliament's site as an example on how you should do it? They made the regulation, surely you should follow their example.
XCSme 6y ago
That's incredible and just shows how stupid this directive was. In my opinion it destroyed the user privacy and user experience: the average user now clicks "accept" as soon as he visits a site. This made it easy to fool non-technical users to subscribe to push notifications, give access to location and other privacy-invading features. I used the phone of my sister for a few minutes and her notification center was bombarded with random push notifications froms sites he visited and to which she unknowingly subscribed to.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  I agree that the current lack of enforcement is bad for the intent of the law and its long-term impact. Currently the lack of enforcement allows non-compliant solutions (where accepting is easier than declining) to thrive so people get used to accepting everything. Down the line, even when enforcement catches up and compliant solutions start appearing, users will still be clicking accept because they've been trained to do so. This is unfortunately good for adtech/martech not just now but in the future, so all of those currently making your money on stalking users, don't cry, it's all gonna be okay.

Mirioron 6y ago

Maybe all these websites are simply taking the EU Parliament's site as an example on how you should do it? They made the regulation, surely you should follow their example.

XCSme 6y ago

That's incredible and just shows how stupid this directive was. In my opinion it destroyed the user privacy and user experience: the average user now clicks "accept" as soon as he visits a site. This made it easy to fool non-technical users to subscribe to push notifications, give access to location and other privacy-invading features. I used the phone of my sister for a few minutes and her notification center was bombarded with random push notifications froms sites he visited and to which she unknowingly subscribed to.

Nextgrid 6y ago
I agree that the current lack of enforcement is bad for the intent of the law and its long-term impact. Currently the lack of enforcement allows non-compliant solutions (where accepting is easier than declining) to thrive so people get used to accepting everything. Down the line, even when enforcement catches up and compliant solutions start appearing, users will still be clicking accept because they've been trained to do so. This is unfortunately good for adtech/martech not just now but in the future, so all of those currently making your money on stalking users, don't cry, it's all gonna be okay.