3 ms·

Yes, the lack of tracking cookies is doom and gloom for those who want to track people. That's kind of the point of the law. People should be free not to be t

Yes, the lack of tracking cookies is doom and gloom for those who want to track people. That's kind of the point of the law. People should be free not to be tracked. Here's an interesting question, though. Does the law prevent you from preventing users from using the site if they don't accept the cookies? Free websites each some of their money from advertising, and they optimize that advertising (among other things) with tracking cookies. If websites start demanding that you accept cookies, it won't be long before there are 'auto-accept cookies' plugins and such for lazy web users. Because let's be honest. If people -really- cared they'd block the cookies with a plugin or refuse to visit sites that use them. And most people haven't.

CodeMage 15y ago
I find it extremely ironic that the end result of the scenario you describe is that the people who right now make a conscious decision and effort to avoid being tracked will end up screwed.
- wccrawford 15y ago
  I hadn't thought of it like that, but it's true. If things happen like I suggested, it will actually result in less freedom for people who care about it, and the same for those who don't. This is why the effect of laws should be thoroughly researched before they are passed. Hoping for the best isn't good enough.
corin_ 15y ago
"Yes, the lack of tracking cookies is doom and gloom for those who want to track people." I believe that some level of tracking should be allowed by default, unless a user goes out of their way to avoid it. Much the same as walking into a supermarket, I don't want them knowing what shop I just came from, and what I usually buy (unless I sign up for that stuff), but if they want to count how many times I visit in a week, or what sex I am, anonymously, why should I get a say in stopping that? Possibly biased given I work in digital marketing, but I don't think so.
- underwater 15y ago
  Maybe a good compromise would be to disallow session based cookies without opt-in. Sites could still store values like 'visits=11;opt-in=rejected;zip=94304;locale=en_US'. It would be much more transparent as to what the site is tracking and relatively easy to police.

CodeMage 15y ago

I find it extremely ironic that the end result of the scenario you describe is that the people who right now make a conscious decision and effort to avoid being tracked will end up screwed.

wccrawford 15y ago
I hadn't thought of it like that, but it's true. If things happen like I suggested, it will actually result in less freedom for people who care about it, and the same for those who don't. This is why the effect of laws should be thoroughly researched before they are passed. Hoping for the best isn't good enough.

corin_ 15y ago

"Yes, the lack of tracking cookies is doom and gloom for those who want to track people." I believe that some level of tracking should be allowed by default, unless a user goes out of their way to avoid it. Much the same as walking into a supermarket, I don't want them knowing what shop I just came from, and what I usually buy (unless I sign up for that stuff), but if they want to count how many times I visit in a week, or what sex I am, anonymously, why should I get a say in stopping that? Possibly biased given I work in digital marketing, but I don't think so.

underwater 15y ago
Maybe a good compromise would be to disallow session based cookies without opt-in. Sites could still store values like 'visits=11;opt-in=rejected;zip=94304;locale=en_US'. It would be much more transparent as to what the site is tracking and relatively easy to police.