5 ms·

This article is not at all skeptical of this regulation. I'm especially skeptical about legislation coming from the body responsible for making me click dozens

This article is not at all skeptical of this regulation. I'm especially skeptical about legislation coming from the body responsible for making me click dozens of "Accept Cookies" buttons every day.

timtom39 4y ago
EasyList Cookie. uBlockOrigin has it built in. FF mobile can run it.
Jochim 4y ago
The website choosing to sell your browsing data is the reason you have to click those buttons.
- jamiequint 4y ago
  I don't have to click them in the US (yet), so clearly not.
  - rat9988 4y ago
    Yes, but your data is getting collected and sold and you are powerless about it.
    - dnissley 4y ago
      Can you describe the concrete harm that comes from data collection?
      - chezelenkoooo 4y ago
        I think that's besides the point. Shouldn't you have the option of deciding whether your data is sold or not?
        hash872 4y ago
        Is your contention that if I click 'no' on the GPDR nag screen it won't sell/harvest my data? The few times that I've looked at the T&Cs more closely, they simply say that some cookies are 'essential' for the website and that I can't opt out from them. I took that to mean that clicking anything was accepting their T&Cs to some degree- hence, I refuse to click any GPDR nag screens ever. If clicking 'no' is effective, it raises the question of why can't that just be done automatically for me by my browser, sparing me the obnoxious nag screens
        EMIRELADERO 4y ago
        > If clicking 'no' is effective, it raises the question of why can't that just be done automatically for me by my browser, sparing me the obnoxious nag screens Because it's in the website owner's best interest to make the rejecting process be as cumbersome and annoying as possible. The whole thing is a show of bad faith.
        Jochim 4y ago
        Essential cookies refer to cookies required for the technical operation of the site. There is no requirement to notify a user of essential cookies. Here are some examples of the type of functionality covered by essential cookies: - Persisting a shopping cart. - Storing your login session. - Identifying the node that should handle your requests. Site operators are forbidden by the law from using essential cookies for tracking purposes. If a site operator is classifying tracking cookies as essential, or using their essential cookies for tracking then they are very likely acting in violation of the law.
        personomas 4y ago
        No. When you visit your friends house, do you get to make the rules and tell them, what food you get for dinner, how you like your back rubbed, etc? No, if you don't like it, don't visit them. Forcing ridiculous laws on them does not lead to good.
        corney91 4y ago
    - csomar 4y ago
      Don't visit these websites?
      - Jochim 4y ago
        How does the average user tell how a site might track them without first visiting it? How does the average user tell that a site that they initially found to be free from tracking hasn't started to track them since?
  - Jochim 4y ago
    If you live in California then you probably should be clicking them according to: https://www.cookielaw.org/regulations/ccpa/ https://www.cookielaw.org/regulations/ccpa/
- crazygringo 4y ago
  No, the reason is quite clearly the EU legislation. It's largely predictable how companies will react to legislation, and it's 100% clear afterwards, and it's very much the fault of the EU for sticking to the path of cookie popups.
andrewmutz 4y ago
I completely agree. The GDPR had the best of intentions, but did not materially improve data privacy online. Meanwhile it has absolutely made the UX of the web worse. I know what the responses will be: "its a great law with poor enforcement". Perhaps that's true, but if so what makes us think additional EU tech regulations will be any better enforced?
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  > did not materially improve data privacy online. I personally saw drastic improvements. I remember marketing adding or rotating trackers every 3 months as they got pitches from random companies. Those basically vanished the day we had to keep track of which company stored their data in which region, and where in the privacy policy list we had to slot them. User data still goes to Google or Adobe, but getting rid of all the weird scammy players is a win in my book. And it also helped justify investing in stronger internal data management and analysis instead. Basically adding random third party libraries suddenly had a material cost, and I don't see any other initiative that could have realistically reached that result.
makeitdouble 4y ago
Was it better for you to click through popups and site redirects and dozens of JS trackers ? GDPR brought a lot of new UI to existing sites, but I don't get the feeling that we were on a good trend from the start, nor that the sites that care about their users got a lot worse because of it. I mean, at that time we were getting out of Flash inserts and the whole industry didn't seem to ever stop to think about what they were doing. The very notion of user consent was foreign to many agencies before GDPR. PS: even looking at the sheer amount of "subscribe to our newsletter" splash dialogs out there make the clumsiest cookie popups look cute to me.

This article is not at all skeptical of this regulation. I'm especially skeptical about legislation coming from the body responsible for making me click dozens of "Accept Cookies" buttons every day.

timtom39 4y ago

EasyList Cookie. uBlockOrigin has it built in. FF mobile can run it.

Jochim 4y ago

The website choosing to sell your browsing data is the reason you have to click those buttons.

jamiequint 4y ago
I don't have to click them in the US (yet), so clearly not.
- rat9988 4y ago
  Yes, but your data is getting collected and sold and you are powerless about it.
  - dnissley 4y ago
    Can you describe the concrete harm that comes from data collection?
    - chezelenkoooo 4y ago
      I think that's besides the point. Shouldn't you have the option of deciding whether your data is sold or not?
      - hash872 4y ago
        Is your contention that if I click 'no' on the GPDR nag screen it won't sell/harvest my data? The few times that I've looked at the T&Cs more closely, they simply say that some cookies are 'essential' for the website and that I can't opt out from them. I took that to mean that clicking anything was accepting their T&Cs to some degree- hence, I refuse to click any GPDR nag screens ever. If clicking 'no' is effective, it raises the question of why can't that just be done automatically for me by my browser, sparing me the obnoxious nag screens
        EMIRELADERO 4y ago
        > If clicking 'no' is effective, it raises the question of why can't that just be done automatically for me by my browser, sparing me the obnoxious nag screens Because it's in the website owner's best interest to make the rejecting process be as cumbersome and annoying as possible. The whole thing is a show of bad faith.
        Jochim 4y ago
        Essential cookies refer to cookies required for the technical operation of the site. There is no requirement to notify a user of essential cookies. Here are some examples of the type of functionality covered by essential cookies: - Persisting a shopping cart. - Storing your login session. - Identifying the node that should handle your requests. Site operators are forbidden by the law from using essential cookies for tracking purposes. If a site operator is classifying tracking cookies as essential, or using their essential cookies for tracking then they are very likely acting in violation of the law.
      - personomas 4y ago
        No. When you visit your friends house, do you get to make the rules and tell them, what food you get for dinner, how you like your back rubbed, etc? No, if you don't like it, don't visit them. Forcing ridiculous laws on them does not lead to good.
        corney91 4y ago
  - csomar 4y ago
    Don't visit these websites?
    - Jochim 4y ago
      How does the average user tell how a site might track them without first visiting it? How does the average user tell that a site that they initially found to be free from tracking hasn't started to track them since?
- Jochim 4y ago
  If you live in California then you probably should be clicking them according to: https://www.cookielaw.org/regulations/ccpa/ https://www.cookielaw.org/regulations/ccpa/
crazygringo 4y ago
No, the reason is quite clearly the EU legislation. It's largely predictable how companies will react to legislation, and it's 100% clear afterwards, and it's very much the fault of the EU for sticking to the path of cookie popups.

andrewmutz 4y ago

I completely agree. The GDPR had the best of intentions, but did not materially improve data privacy online. Meanwhile it has absolutely made the UX of the web worse. I know what the responses will be: "its a great law with poor enforcement". Perhaps that's true, but if so what makes us think additional EU tech regulations will be any better enforced?

makeitdouble 4y ago
> did not materially improve data privacy online. I personally saw drastic improvements. I remember marketing adding or rotating trackers every 3 months as they got pitches from random companies. Those basically vanished the day we had to keep track of which company stored their data in which region, and where in the privacy policy list we had to slot them. User data still goes to Google or Adobe, but getting rid of all the weird scammy players is a win in my book. And it also helped justify investing in stronger internal data management and analysis instead. Basically adding random third party libraries suddenly had a material cost, and I don't see any other initiative that could have realistically reached that result.

makeitdouble 4y ago

Was it better for you to click through popups and site redirects and dozens of JS trackers ? GDPR brought a lot of new UI to existing sites, but I don't get the feeling that we were on a good trend from the start, nor that the sites that care about their users got a lot worse because of it. I mean, at that time we were getting out of Flash inserts and the whole industry didn't seem to ever stop to think about what they were doing. The very notion of user consent was foreign to many agencies before GDPR. PS: even looking at the sheer amount of "subscribe to our newsletter" splash dialogs out there make the clumsiest cookie popups look cute to me.