4 ms·
Where the letter of the law is more important than the intent, there's always more wiggle room to screw over the consumer. But where intent and interpretation i
by bborud 5y ago
Where the letter of the law is more important than the intent, there's always more wiggle room to screw over the consumer. But where intent and interpretation is given more weight, things tend to be less predictable for businesses.
There was a story yesterday about someone getting terribly upset about researchers probing the GDPR compliance of the website of a blogger. Some froth developed around people's mouths as the site in question was called a "victim" and any shrugs seen as "victim-blaming". (And I was thoroughly downvoted for pointing out that calling website owners "victims" was a bit more drama than was called for)
GDPR and similar legislation has, as you correctly pointed out, had disappointing results. There is no doubt that stronger regulation is needed to stop companies essentially spying on users for financial gain - just as there is no doubt that regulating this in a way that both helps, and doesn't just become an expensive waste of time, is hard.
- ls15 5y ago> GDPR and similar legislation has, as you correctly pointed out, had disappointing results. There is no doubt that stronger regulation is needed to stop companies essentially spying on users for financial gain - just as there is no doubt that regulating this in a way that both helps, and doesn't just become an expensive waste of time, is hard. And that's why I find the line of argumentation that says 'the consent law is fine, just give it more time' a bit frustrating. It is such a waste of time and energy, while it does not really tackle the core issue of data abuse, but it negatively impacts everyone's user experience. I think that the law is not well adjusted plays a major role in the situation that we have today. We are in the fourth year of the law and I see no impulses that would lead to a world without full page overlays on most websites on first visit, where the only primary action is "Accept all". While I as a techie take the time to reject most cookies, the more tech-illiterate part of my family has already sold my firstborn child for a couple of news articles.
- bborud 5y agoI've stopped reading several online publications, and using several service providers because they either try to dark-pattern-bully me into consenting, or just can't seem to "remember" my choices. Every time I see one of the GDPR popups it incentivizes me to think "do I really need to access this content?" - and more and more often I just think "no" and delete the bookmark or make a mental note that "this website isn't worth the click".
- Linosaurus 5y ago> or just can't seem to "remember" my choices. That's actually a good question... how would you do that. I guess the website would need explicit consent to save a cookie with the information that you consent to nothing else.
- ls15 5y agoAnd that's how cookie consent management platforms (CMP) were born. Storing your privacy preferences on yet another third-party platform since 2017. I always found this kind of ironic.
- bborud 5y agoOnly, much of the time they don't actually seem to work. They remind me of those little fan-like gadgets people sell online that goes in your car air intake and supposedly gives you more horsepower. I've always been amazed that there is enough of a market for things, that rather obviously do not work, for companies to actually bother making and selling these things.
- Thiez 5y agoYou do not need consent to place a cookie for just that purpose, so there is really no good reason for a website to forget your choices.
- afiori 5y agoIf the full reject is easy and I am not logged in to a website then personally I like it if the website does not remember my choices: I asked not to be tracked and now they are not tracking me.
- Dylan16807 5y agoAccusing people of "froth" on a different discussion when you're naming the wrong law and not even mentioning why people were upset. Nice.