6 ms·

Even if I agreed with your analysis (which I don't, and 'corporate leeches' and 'greedy bastards' is unnecessarily aggressive & uncharitable)- I don't think tha

Even if I agreed with your analysis (which I don't, and 'corporate leeches' and 'greedy bastards' is unnecessarily aggressive & uncharitable)- I don't think that littering every website on planet Earth with forced consent boxes is the right solution. They could've passed all of the other elements of GPDR and excluded the mandatory nag screens, they contribute nothing and make the world just a little bit of a worse place

detaro 5y ago
Indeed, the correct solution is not littering every website on planet Earth with tracking/unnecessary cookies.
dmitriid 5y ago
> I don't think that littering every website on planet Earth with forced consent boxes is the right solution. The absolute vast majority of those boxes are illegal under GDPR. However you've been brainwashed into thinking it's the GDPRs fault. > They could've passed all of the other elements of GPDR and excluded the mandatory nag screens Those screens are not mandatory. It's literally: - you don't need to ask consent for data that is strictly necessary for the operation of your website - for any additional data you need to ask for consent with the default and clearly labeled option being "I do not consent" That is it. There's nothing mandatory about presenting you with "accept all 270 ad/analytics/data harvesting companies".
- hash872 5y ago
  I've seen a lot of people make this claim, but I find it hard to believe that basically every website on Earth is violating GPDR with the nag screens (if they're so willing to break the law, why don't they just not have any popups at all?) And I also I find your explanation difficult to believe because nonprofits, government bodies, and various non-commercial websites (like someone's blog) that are not engaged in data harvesting are all just as aggressive about consent boxes. I think a more likely explanation is that every website on Earth, including all of the non-commercial ones who aren't doing data harvesting, find the law vague and feel like they need to have a consent screen just to make sure they don't get fined somehow
  - scarface74 5y ago
    You mean a law with 13 chapters and 99 sections is vague? Who would have thought?
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > I've seen a lot of people make this claim, but I find it hard to believe that basically every website on Earth is violating GPDR with the nag screens It's not hard. It's enough to look at those screens. And the reasons are simple: 1. Too many devs believe, like you do, that it's the law that is bad, and not, you know, leeches and parasites who collect and sell personal data left and right. This is not helped by the fact that most devs outsource this to parasites like OneTrust, and Digital Advertisment Alliance, and Interactive Advertising Bureau, and... who promise you to provide you with "GDPR-compliant dialogs" which is a blatant lie. So, you get a proliferation of dialogs like these: https://twitter.com/dmitriid/status/1347577262682607616 https://twitter.com/dmitriid/status/1347577262682607616 Do devs like you care? No. Because "law bad I read it on HN". Oh, aand don't forget "analysts and experts" like Startechery who argue that GDPR is a disaster because Facebook has a trove of private user data it collected without consent, and potential new social networks in Europe cannot collect private user data wholesale https://stratechery.com/2021/the-webs-missing-interoperability/ https://stratechery.com/2021/the-webs-missing-interoperabili... 2. Too many devs couldn't be arsed to read anything about the law even though it's now been 6 years since it was introduced. There are people in this thread who are in all seriousness stating that a 13 chapter law is hard, and vague, and complex, and long. Newsflash: human activity is complex, and vague, and long. And GDPR is one of the simpler and more concise laws out there. Moreover, data protection laws have existed in European countries for literally decades. Where were you and other bemoaners? Oh, right, you either didn't know or ignored or broke those laws. Well, EU countries got together and said, "okay, our national laws are clearly not enough, we'll create an all-encompassing law that is applicable to the whole of the EU and specify what you get for breaking it." Another half-decade passes and cue in developers who still couldn't be assed to not siphon and sell personal data, and who blame the law. > find the law vague and feel like they like they couldn't be bothered to read even the smallest bit of info on the law, didn't do it before GDPR (when other data protection laws existed, and those laws still exits today), and haven't bother to read and understand anything about the law in the 6 years since. Does your business even pay taxes, or "nah, the law is too complex"? All laws are vague. Because human activities are too complex to properly define and describe. Is GDPR vague? Yes, for some activities. Is it so vague as to be unimplementable? No, for the absolite vast majority of cases. Does the ad and tracking industry care? No. Do you care? No, you believe what the ad and tracking industry tells you.
- scarface74 5y ago
  So the government passing the law isn’t bad, just them passing a law with unintended consequences and not enforcing it is bad? I fail to see the difference.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    Yes, non-enforcement is bad. But, thankfully, we're slowly seeing an uptick in enforcement. For example, lazy devs everywhere use IAB's "GDPR-compliant dialog". Which isn't. Hopefully they will be fined the maximum fine applicable under GDPR: https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/iab-europe-tcf-gdpr-breach-belgium/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/iab-europe-tcf-gdpr-breach...
avianlyric 5y ago
> They could've passed all of the other elements of GPDR and excluded the mandatory nag screens GDPR doesn’t specify “mandatory nag screens”. It only requires that you ask permission to collect and process other peoples data, if processing that data isn’t absolutely necessary to access the service they’ve requested. If you just give people what ask for, and don’t try and surreptitiously collect, process and monetise their data, then you don’t need ask for consent, so no need for consent boxes. Wanna see a real life example of a GDPR compliant site with no consent boxes? Head here: http://GitHub.com http://GitHub.com

detaro 5y ago

Indeed, the correct solution is not littering every website on planet Earth with tracking/unnecessary cookies.

dmitriid 5y ago

> I don't think that littering every website on planet Earth with forced consent boxes is the right solution. The absolute vast majority of those boxes are illegal under GDPR. However you've been brainwashed into thinking it's the GDPRs fault. > They could've passed all of the other elements of GPDR and excluded the mandatory nag screens Those screens are not mandatory. It's literally: - you don't need to ask consent for data that is strictly necessary for the operation of your website - for any additional data you need to ask for consent with the default and clearly labeled option being "I do not consent" That is it. There's nothing mandatory about presenting you with "accept all 270 ad/analytics/data harvesting companies".

hash872 5y ago
I've seen a lot of people make this claim, but I find it hard to believe that basically every website on Earth is violating GPDR with the nag screens (if they're so willing to break the law, why don't they just not have any popups at all?) And I also I find your explanation difficult to believe because nonprofits, government bodies, and various non-commercial websites (like someone's blog) that are not engaged in data harvesting are all just as aggressive about consent boxes. I think a more likely explanation is that every website on Earth, including all of the non-commercial ones who aren't doing data harvesting, find the law vague and feel like they need to have a consent screen just to make sure they don't get fined somehow
- scarface74 5y ago
  You mean a law with 13 chapters and 99 sections is vague? Who would have thought?
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > I've seen a lot of people make this claim, but I find it hard to believe that basically every website on Earth is violating GPDR with the nag screens It's not hard. It's enough to look at those screens. And the reasons are simple: 1. Too many devs believe, like you do, that it's the law that is bad, and not, you know, leeches and parasites who collect and sell personal data left and right. This is not helped by the fact that most devs outsource this to parasites like OneTrust, and Digital Advertisment Alliance, and Interactive Advertising Bureau, and... who promise you to provide you with "GDPR-compliant dialogs" which is a blatant lie. So, you get a proliferation of dialogs like these: https://twitter.com/dmitriid/status/1347577262682607616 https://twitter.com/dmitriid/status/1347577262682607616 Do devs like you care? No. Because "law bad I read it on HN". Oh, aand don't forget "analysts and experts" like Startechery who argue that GDPR is a disaster because Facebook has a trove of private user data it collected without consent, and potential new social networks in Europe cannot collect private user data wholesale https://stratechery.com/2021/the-webs-missing-interoperability/ https://stratechery.com/2021/the-webs-missing-interoperabili... 2. Too many devs couldn't be arsed to read anything about the law even though it's now been 6 years since it was introduced. There are people in this thread who are in all seriousness stating that a 13 chapter law is hard, and vague, and complex, and long. Newsflash: human activity is complex, and vague, and long. And GDPR is one of the simpler and more concise laws out there. Moreover, data protection laws have existed in European countries for literally decades. Where were you and other bemoaners? Oh, right, you either didn't know or ignored or broke those laws. Well, EU countries got together and said, "okay, our national laws are clearly not enough, we'll create an all-encompassing law that is applicable to the whole of the EU and specify what you get for breaking it." Another half-decade passes and cue in developers who still couldn't be assed to not siphon and sell personal data, and who blame the law. > find the law vague and feel like they like they couldn't be bothered to read even the smallest bit of info on the law, didn't do it before GDPR (when other data protection laws existed, and those laws still exits today), and haven't bother to read and understand anything about the law in the 6 years since. Does your business even pay taxes, or "nah, the law is too complex"? All laws are vague. Because human activities are too complex to properly define and describe. Is GDPR vague? Yes, for some activities. Is it so vague as to be unimplementable? No, for the absolite vast majority of cases. Does the ad and tracking industry care? No. Do you care? No, you believe what the ad and tracking industry tells you.
scarface74 5y ago
So the government passing the law isn’t bad, just them passing a law with unintended consequences and not enforcing it is bad? I fail to see the difference.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  Yes, non-enforcement is bad. But, thankfully, we're slowly seeing an uptick in enforcement. For example, lazy devs everywhere use IAB's "GDPR-compliant dialog". Which isn't. Hopefully they will be fined the maximum fine applicable under GDPR: https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/iab-europe-tcf-gdpr-breach-belgium/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/11/05/iab-europe-tcf-gdpr-breach...

avianlyric 5y ago

> They could've passed all of the other elements of GPDR and excluded the mandatory nag screens GDPR doesn’t specify “mandatory nag screens”. It only requires that you ask permission to collect and process other peoples data, if processing that data isn’t absolutely necessary to access the service they’ve requested. If you just give people what ask for, and don’t try and surreptitiously collect, process and monetise their data, then you don’t need ask for consent, so no need for consent boxes. Wanna see a real life example of a GDPR compliant site with no consent boxes? Head here: http://GitHub.com http://GitHub.com