2 ms·
This all assumes websites won't just ignore your choices or deceive you either way, which is a real risk whether you do it via browser or not. The only real dif
by alpaca128 5y ago
This all assumes websites won't just ignore your choices or deceive you either way, which is a real risk whether you do it via browser or not. The only real difference is UX. Users want a "no and never ask me again" button, and that's not possible if every website has to ask you separately.
> If the "browser" did this for me I wouldn't know what absolute illegal nonsense they would try to sneak in via "legitimate interest".
Of course you would, if it's done properly. The browser would be able to list the cookies too, but in this case in one consistent UI that wasn't built with malicious intent.
- tjoff 5y agoSure, that is true. But given the wide-spread use of banners it is at least obvious that they care enough to ruin their own UX. Which is also a huge cost. As you say, users want a "no and never ask me again". Well, you can have that today. Just don't do anything that requires anyone to say no. And again, if a site chooses that path then the banner is a feature. It is disrespectful and although it is a royal pain it is very good for users to know up front what kind of entity they are dealing with. Remove that and people will become apathetic to it.