4 ms·

Why should people turn it on - when most people just don't care? That's the same problem we have in the EU right now. The correct way to deal with cookies woul

by gst 15y ago

Why should people turn it on - when most people just don't care? That's the same problem we have in the EU right now. The correct way to deal with cookies would be for people to enable or disable them in their browser, according to their personal preferences. Instead, the EU forces their cookie legislation on everybody, because most people are too lazy to fix their preferences.

barrkel 15y ago
It's precisely because grandmothers are "too lazy to fix their preferences" that governments step in.
SoftwareMaven 15y ago
Most people have no idea what a "cookie" is, nor how or why they should manage them. Calling people lazy for not managing them is the epitome of engineering arrogance. Browsers need better, more clear, interfaces for managing cookies and websites need to provide easily parses info on what each cookie is for before people will even be able to manage them.
- gst 15y ago
  If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident. Why should this be any different with computers? The risk that you pose to others is pretty low, so there shouldn't be any requirement to have a "license". But I wouldn't call it arrogance, if I'll assume that someone using the network has a minimum knowledge about how things work.
  - blahedo 15y ago
    > If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. Only to a point. I own a car and am perfectly competent to use it, but I have only the vaguest of understanding as to what things like spark plugs and catalytic converters do. I know what a manifold is in mathematics, and I suppose it's a bit similar in a car engine. I deem myself knowledgeable to open the bonnet and add windshield wiper fluid when that's low, but anything more complicated I'll take to a mechanic. > If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident. It's my fault if I drive without, say, learning how to operate the brake pedal, or learning how to turn on the turn signal. But if the accident is due to something wrong with the internals that I know very little about? I don't think any reasonable person believes that getting licensed to drive should require one to have the knowledge of an automobile mechanic.
    - thwarted 15y ago
      This isn't the equivalent of spark plugs. It's the equivalent knowing how the windows work. If you drive around with the windows down while yelling at the person in the passenger, seat, don't be surprised if other people can hear you. And you can't use as a defense that you didn't know that you needed to have the windows up.
- thwarted 15y ago
  This is partially what the P3P standard was defined to help with, and the only browser that every seemed to do anything mildly meaningful with it was Internet Explorer. All IE did was refuse to set/keep cookies if either a P3P header wasn't provided or it didn't match the "user's preferences" (which the user never looked at or understood), so it just ended up causing headaches for web developers who at first tried to figure out which parts of the site's privacy policy matched the codes in the header value. When they found out that didn't work, they just copied the value of Google's P3P header. So many sites' privacy and data collection policies didn't match what they were asserting in the P3P headers, because otherwise, the site didn't work.
icebraining 15y ago
I disagree. I have no problem with a cookie that sets a completely anonymous option, or which tells the server that I'm on a certain state, or that I've been here already so don't show me X, show my Y instead. I only dislike tracking cookies. Browsers have no way of deciding which cookies are tracking and which aren't, and disabling them all causes all kinds of problems, including with sessions. Legislation, on the other hand, is less 'blind' and lets websites using cookies for functionality the user required and/or is informed of (like sessions, preferences and such) without letting websites perform unauthorized tracking.

by gst 15y ago

barrkel 15y ago

It's precisely because grandmothers are "too lazy to fix their preferences" that governments step in.

SoftwareMaven 15y ago

Most people have no idea what a "cookie" is, nor how or why they should manage them. Calling people lazy for not managing them is the epitome of engineering arrogance. Browsers need better, more clear, interfaces for managing cookies and websites need to provide easily parses info on what each cookie is for before people will even be able to manage them.

gst 15y ago
If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident. Why should this be any different with computers? The risk that you pose to others is pretty low, so there shouldn't be any requirement to have a "license". But I wouldn't call it arrogance, if I'll assume that someone using the network has a minimum knowledge about how things work.
- blahedo 15y ago
  > If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. Only to a point. I own a car and am perfectly competent to use it, but I have only the vaguest of understanding as to what things like spark plugs and catalytic converters do. I know what a manifold is in mathematics, and I suppose it's a bit similar in a car engine. I deem myself knowledgeable to open the bonnet and add windshield wiper fluid when that's low, but anything more complicated I'll take to a mechanic. > If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident. It's my fault if I drive without, say, learning how to operate the brake pedal, or learning how to turn on the turn signal. But if the accident is due to something wrong with the internals that I know very little about? I don't think any reasonable person believes that getting licensed to drive should require one to have the knowledge of an automobile mechanic.
  - thwarted 15y ago
    This isn't the equivalent of spark plugs. It's the equivalent knowing how the windows work. If you drive around with the windows down while yelling at the person in the passenger, seat, don't be surprised if other people can hear you. And you can't use as a defense that you didn't know that you needed to have the windows up.
thwarted 15y ago
This is partially what the P3P standard was defined to help with, and the only browser that every seemed to do anything mildly meaningful with it was Internet Explorer. All IE did was refuse to set/keep cookies if either a P3P header wasn't provided or it didn't match the "user's preferences" (which the user never looked at or understood), so it just ended up causing headaches for web developers who at first tried to figure out which parts of the site's privacy policy matched the codes in the header value. When they found out that didn't work, they just copied the value of Google's P3P header. So many sites' privacy and data collection policies didn't match what they were asserting in the P3P headers, because otherwise, the site didn't work.

icebraining 15y ago

I disagree. I have no problem with a cookie that sets a completely anonymous option, or which tells the server that I'm on a certain state, or that I've been here already so don't show me X, show my Y instead. I only dislike tracking cookies. Browsers have no way of deciding which cookies are tracking and which aren't, and disabling them all causes all kinds of problems, including with sessions. Legislation, on the other hand, is less 'blind' and lets websites using cookies for functionality the user required and/or is informed of (like sessions, preferences and such) without letting websites perform unauthorized tracking.