3 ms·

There are solutions to most of that, e.g. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/consent-o-matic/mdjildafknihdffpkfmmpnpoiajfjnjd https://chrome.google.com/w

There are solutions to most of that, e.g. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/consent-o-matic/mdjildafknihdffpkfmmpnpoiajfjnjd https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/consent-o-matic/md...

danuker 5y ago
This is more of a workaround. A solution to a poliical problem is political, not technical.
- mlatu 5y ago
  i would call it societal; society still needs to grasp in what way they are being exploited. it's still not clear to most people
- emsixteen 5y ago
  How is it political?
  - danuker 5y ago
    The decision to force service providers collect consent from their own users is a political decision. And a fundamentally bad one: providers' incentive is to make it easy to get consent and hard to refuse. I don't know what policy is better than this, but right now, we only get more annoyance without any benefits in privacy. Pretty much every page I've visited issues 3rd party requests before I consent to data sharing.
KronisLV 5y ago
Those are (nice) solutions to a problem that shouldn't be allowed to (legally) exist. The industry shouldn't be allowed to play clever with the ways to coerce their users into giving up their information just because they know that most of those users are not interested in navigating difficult dialogs.
- black_puppydog 5y ago
  They shouldn't be allowed, and they aren't allowed. Actually the new digital services act [0] is shaping up to clarify these, but IIRC there have also been first cases decided in courts. [0]: https://edri.org/our-work/the-eu-parliament-takes-strong-stance-against-surveillance-ads/ https://edri.org/our-work/the-eu-parliament-takes-strong-sta...
- friendzis 5y ago
  This particular behavior is actually illegal. GDPR [Recital 32] clearly states that "Consent should be given by a clear affirmative act <...> Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity should not therefore constitute consent." [Recital 32]: https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-32/ https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-32/

There are solutions to most of that, e.g. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/consent-o-matic/mdjildafknihdffpkfmmpnpoiajfjnjd https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/consent-o-matic/md...

danuker 5y ago

This is more of a workaround. A solution to a poliical problem is political, not technical.

mlatu 5y ago
i would call it societal; society still needs to grasp in what way they are being exploited. it's still not clear to most people
emsixteen 5y ago
How is it political?
- danuker 5y ago
  The decision to force service providers collect consent from their own users is a political decision. And a fundamentally bad one: providers' incentive is to make it easy to get consent and hard to refuse. I don't know what policy is better than this, but right now, we only get more annoyance without any benefits in privacy. Pretty much every page I've visited issues 3rd party requests before I consent to data sharing.

KronisLV 5y ago

Those are (nice) solutions to a problem that shouldn't be allowed to (legally) exist. The industry shouldn't be allowed to play clever with the ways to coerce their users into giving up their information just because they know that most of those users are not interested in navigating difficult dialogs.

black_puppydog 5y ago
They shouldn't be allowed, and they aren't allowed. Actually the new digital services act [0] is shaping up to clarify these, but IIRC there have also been first cases decided in courts. [0]: https://edri.org/our-work/the-eu-parliament-takes-strong-stance-against-surveillance-ads/ https://edri.org/our-work/the-eu-parliament-takes-strong-sta...
friendzis 5y ago
This particular behavior is actually illegal. GDPR [Recital 32] clearly states that "Consent should be given by a clear affirmative act <...> Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity should not therefore constitute consent." [Recital 32]: https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-32/ https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-32/