4 ms·
I feel like something should have been implemented at browser level through HTML meta tags to display the cookie banner. This would allow websites to declare te
by thiht 6y ago
I feel like something should have been implemented at browser level through HTML meta tags to display the cookie banner. This would allow websites to declare technical cookies that cannot be blocked and other cookies that can be blocked by the user. We could even have a standardized, native cookie banner in the same way as the permissions asked by the browser.
Any idea if there's a chance to get this one day?
- onion2k 6y agoWhat if I want to block "technical cookies"?
- thiht 6y agoAt this point just block all the cookies with the browser setting.
- onion2k 6y agoYou suggested browsers should implement unblockable "technical cookies" though, when you said "This would allow websites to declare technical cookies that cannot be blocked and other cookies that can be blocked by the user." Your own suggestion would stop me blocking them in the browser, unless "that cannot be blocked" means something other than what it sounds like.
- thiht 6y agoNot the point, that's nitpicking. The point is that cookie banners should be a browser component.
- aembleton 6y agoThen block them. Use uMatrix or one of the other plugins to do so.
- onion2k 6y agoRead the post I was responding to. thiht suggested "This would allow websites to declare technical cookies that cannot be blocked and other cookies that can be blocked by the user." He suggested browsers should be implement unblockable cookies. I was asking what happens if I want to block them...
- thiht 6y agoI was suggesting blockable cookies in the context of this hypothetical cookie banner. It wouldn't prevent you from blocking all the cookies if you want, just not in this banner.
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoThey tried something similar with the do-not-track setting / header, but it was not backed by legislation so respecting it was purely optional, and a lot of companies opted to not respect it. In theory that would've covered it, along with a setting on startup / a review notification every once in a while, but without the legislation backing it, it wasn't successful.
- jaekash 6y agoCan companies not also choose to not respect your choice on their popups? Seems like the rationale for preferring popups over this is not very sound to me.
- mnw21cam 6y agoSounds like the evil bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_bit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_bit to me.
- thiht 6y agoThat's not the point. The law is there, we have to deal with it. But implementing it on browser side would just be a less awful way to implement it everywhere.
- akvadrako 6y agoThat won't work because most people will want to just permanently block tracking cookies. You could legislate it, but it would effectively kill targeted advertising. The dialogues are only necessary because the website owners want to send you tracking cookies. If they choose not to, there is no need for any kind of banner, native or otherwise.
- thiht 6y ago> That won't work because most people will want to just permanently block tracking cookies. You could legislate it, but it would effectively kill targeted advertising So? The only difference between what I suggest and what we have is user friendliness. The law is already here.
- watwut 6y agoYeah, but technical obtuseness is intentional. First, to force users to click "accept all" and second to make users hate the law. It could be more user friendly, but that is not desired political/economical result.
- 0-O-0 6y agoSo Chrome isn't going to implement it for obvious reasons, Firefox (which is funded by Google) isn't going to implement it either. Maybe Safari? I'm not sure if Apple cares. Brave? Brendan Eich will probably get assassinated before this change is rolled out.
- neop1x 6y agoTargeted advertisement can be killed. I never bought something based on such ads and I don't need to see the same products I bought yesterday repeated over and over again on many unrelated sites.