7 ms·
What is up with that site giving me three seperate popups warning me that the site uses cookies
by _just7_ 4y ago
What is up with that site giving me three seperate popups warning me that the site uses cookies
- nier 4y agoDisabling content blockers, I can see what you’re describing. Seems like satire.
- iscrewyou 4y agoway of tangent from this thread but which content blockers do you use?
- jdeibele 4y agoNot the poster but the Hush extension for Safari seems to work well on this site because I didn't see any notices. And that's what it's supposed to accomplish. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/hush-nag-blocker/id1544743900 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/hush-nag-blocker/id1544743900 I'm sure there are similar things for FireFox or Chromium browsers but Hush seems Safari-only.
- nier 3y agoI was surprised to find only AdGuard on my main iPhone. I do also use Hush on my other one. AdGuard has most all filters enabled except the language-specific ones and the «Other» category.
- throwaway1777 4y agoThanks GDPR!
- jiggawatts 4y agoThanks marketing people that decided to double down despite the clear distaste of the general public at their relentless tracking.
- dmix 4y agoBrowsers like Firefox could hypothetically kill cookies in their browser tomorrow but doesn't. Or at least make a big stink about it. Do you think they should? Do you think we'd be better off as a society?
- slimsag 4y agoYes we'd be better off if cookies were removed. But if it was only Firefox, people would simply add banners saying "Firefox is not supported." since it's only like 3% of marketshare these days.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- PeterisP 4y agoBrowsers can't tell if a cookie is a generic setting ("chose Yes/No on a banner") or a uniquely identifiable one; and they can't tell if a cookie is functionally required (ID for a logged-in session) or not (ID to track random visitors). The distinction is legal, not technical; so it has to be enforced by legal, not technical means.
- mjevans 4y agoFirefox COULD default to cookies off (with an in menu widget to force them on for non-automatic handling), and if any forum submission happens _ask_ if the end user wants to accept the site's cookies.
- PeterisP 4y agoLooking at a typical site, a reasonable user might want to accept one (or perhaps a couple) of many dozens of cookies a site attempts to set. Choosing it manually per site per cookie is difficult but perhaps theoretically possible, however even that still requires cooperation from the site to honestly identify that this one is the cookie which is functionally required, and these fifty are for ad tracking, and ensuring that cooperation still requires legal means and can't be done with purely technical ones. Furthermore, there is the important distinction about multiple uses of the same data. There are uniquely identifiable cookies that are functionally required for one purpose but the site may want to use it for other purposes as well (e.g. share that data with heir "trusted partners" for targeted advertising) for which user may reasonably want to refuse permission, so a browser accepting a cookie doesn't imply such permission and something extra is required.
- dpifke 4y agoWhat is up with comments that go against the guidelines? From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.