3 ms·

For anyone who this is news to: This is why I always call the "I don't care about cookies" extension an adtech submarine, because it deceives you into thinking

For anyone who this is news to: This is why I always call the "I don't care about cookies" extension an adtech submarine, because it deceives you into thinking it’s all about cookies, when the permission you give automatically in many cases are about tracking, so using that extension will often have you consent that fingerprinting you and creating a profile based on that is perfectly fine.

meghan_rain 4y ago
Implying they actually stop tracking when you press "Reject"
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  They may not, but if you're in/from the EU and press "Reject" and they still track you, they're breaking the law.
  - zatni 4y ago
    "break the law" means nothing when you're a large corporation that makes more money from breaking it than you spend on fines. Tech companies routinely get fined for what may seem like massive amounts to us. https://www.businessinsider.com/the-7-biggest-fines-the-eu-has-ever-imposed-against-giant-corporations-2018-7?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/the-7-biggest-fines-the-eu-h... If "breaking the law" meant something they would try to avoid doing it so often. Microsoft in the 90s was recognized guilty of abusing their monopoly. What were the consequences? nothing. This sort of thing used to mean something, see: Standard Oil v United States. But the current world is a world that belongs to megacorporations. Tracking people against their will is a drop in the ocean of what corporations get away with. This, in many ways, is like a billionaire getting a ticket that doesn't amount to more than the hundreds of dollars for bad parking. The billionaire doesn't care. Law only has meaning when the punishment is coercive.
miggol 4y ago
To me, the thing is that I can't count on the consent modals to actually do anything. Am I really going to invest time into checking their word? How would I even do that? That's on top of all the time wasted moving sliders or hiting "reject all". For me, the cookie consent modals are the submarines. Why would I outsource the responsibility not to track me to the people with the incentive to track me? IDCAC, Cookie Autodelete, and strict tracking protection feels like the better alternative for me. (From today onwards, I'll add resistFingerprinting=true to that list as well.)
- Semaphor 4y ago
  Obviously this only is relevant for people who think companies care a bit about trying not to flaunt the law, I thought that was a given. There are also proper consent blockers [0], but they are not as big because everyone tells people to use that please track me shit. [0]: https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic

meghan_rain 4y ago

Implying they actually stop tracking when you press "Reject"

TeMPOraL 4y ago
They may not, but if you're in/from the EU and press "Reject" and they still track you, they're breaking the law.
- zatni 4y ago
  "break the law" means nothing when you're a large corporation that makes more money from breaking it than you spend on fines. Tech companies routinely get fined for what may seem like massive amounts to us. https://www.businessinsider.com/the-7-biggest-fines-the-eu-has-ever-imposed-against-giant-corporations-2018-7?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/the-7-biggest-fines-the-eu-h... If "breaking the law" meant something they would try to avoid doing it so often. Microsoft in the 90s was recognized guilty of abusing their monopoly. What were the consequences? nothing. This sort of thing used to mean something, see: Standard Oil v United States. But the current world is a world that belongs to megacorporations. Tracking people against their will is a drop in the ocean of what corporations get away with. This, in many ways, is like a billionaire getting a ticket that doesn't amount to more than the hundreds of dollars for bad parking. The billionaire doesn't care. Law only has meaning when the punishment is coercive.

miggol 4y ago

To me, the thing is that I can't count on the consent modals to actually do anything. Am I really going to invest time into checking their word? How would I even do that? That's on top of all the time wasted moving sliders or hiting "reject all". For me, the cookie consent modals are the submarines. Why would I outsource the responsibility not to track me to the people with the incentive to track me? IDCAC, Cookie Autodelete, and strict tracking protection feels like the better alternative for me. (From today onwards, I'll add resistFingerprinting=true to that list as well.)

Semaphor 4y ago
Obviously this only is relevant for people who think companies care a bit about trying not to flaunt the law, I thought that was a given. There are also proper consent blockers [0], but they are not as big because everyone tells people to use that please track me shit. [0]: https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic