3 ms·

God no. Governments absolutely suck at changing the incentives to deter bad behaviour. Do we really want more cookie banners and GDPR consent forms? Maybe I'm

God no. Governments absolutely suck at changing the incentives to deter bad behaviour. Do we really want more cookie banners and GDPR consent forms? Maybe I'm missing something, but why can't we block all forms of stateful identifiers to third-party content? First-party cookies, localStorage, etc only. Is there some big legitimate use case I'm not seeing? Having said that, I'm sure if they were blocked, tech companies would just provide an SDK that passes through first-party state so companies could continue the status quo.

Nextgrid 6y ago
Some stateful identifiers are required for technical purposes. IP addresses for example. Other identifiers are required for the functionality of the service, such as your contact details or information you enter in a social network. Given you can't work around providing the information, the only solution is to use legislation to prevent that information for being used in malicious ways. Also, the current situation with the consent prompts in Europe is not because of the GDPR but because of its lack of enforcement. The GDPR learned from the former "cookie law" (which I agree was a shit-show) and explicitly prohibits annoying/misleading consent prompts.
- beaconstudios 6y ago
  > Some stateful identifiers are required for technical purposes. IP addresses for example. Yeah that one's pretty unavoidable, but is at least for many people temporary and pseudonymous only. Once their dynamic IP rotates (granted this isn't the case for everybody), the connection is lost. Much better than every website with a "Like" button on the page allowing facebook to track you as you traipse across the internet. > Other identifiers are required for the functionality of the service, such as your contact details or information you enter in a social network. That's first-party information. You're not posting on facebook via an iframe on another site. If you choose to provide your information to facebook, they're gonna use it - legislation or not. Legal encodings of intent are always full of loopholes, even if they escape regulatory capture via lobbying. The best way to stop Facebook from getting information about you, is to not give them information. > Also, the current situation with the consent prompts in Europe is not because of the GDPR but because of its lack of enforcement. The GDPR learned from the former "cookie law" (which I agree was a shit-show) and explicitly prohibits annoying/misleading consent prompts. I'm sure it won't be long before that argument goes to court and teams of lawyers spend the next decade arguing over the meaning of the word "annoying". Hence my argument that if we want Facebook to not know everything about us, perhaps we should stop them knowing everything about us?

Nextgrid 6y ago

Some stateful identifiers are required for technical purposes. IP addresses for example. Other identifiers are required for the functionality of the service, such as your contact details or information you enter in a social network. Given you can't work around providing the information, the only solution is to use legislation to prevent that information for being used in malicious ways. Also, the current situation with the consent prompts in Europe is not because of the GDPR but because of its lack of enforcement. The GDPR learned from the former "cookie law" (which I agree was a shit-show) and explicitly prohibits annoying/misleading consent prompts.

beaconstudios 6y ago
> Some stateful identifiers are required for technical purposes. IP addresses for example. Yeah that one's pretty unavoidable, but is at least for many people temporary and pseudonymous only. Once their dynamic IP rotates (granted this isn't the case for everybody), the connection is lost. Much better than every website with a "Like" button on the page allowing facebook to track you as you traipse across the internet. > Other identifiers are required for the functionality of the service, such as your contact details or information you enter in a social network. That's first-party information. You're not posting on facebook via an iframe on another site. If you choose to provide your information to facebook, they're gonna use it - legislation or not. Legal encodings of intent are always full of loopholes, even if they escape regulatory capture via lobbying. The best way to stop Facebook from getting information about you, is to not give them information. > Also, the current situation with the consent prompts in Europe is not because of the GDPR but because of its lack of enforcement. The GDPR learned from the former "cookie law" (which I agree was a shit-show) and explicitly prohibits annoying/misleading consent prompts. I'm sure it won't be long before that argument goes to court and teams of lawyers spend the next decade arguing over the meaning of the word "annoying". Hence my argument that if we want Facebook to not know everything about us, perhaps we should stop them knowing everything about us?