2 ms·
While I agree with the consent issue, I think consent to use cookies isn't the problem. I already set my browser to not store cookies by default, and make excep
by dheera 4y ago
While I agree with the consent issue, I think consent to use cookies isn't the problem. I already set my browser to not store cookies by default, and make exceptions for a few websites I need to log into.
For me, consent is enforced at the browser level, not the website level. So I don't really care whether I hit "accept" or "decline". Their cookies aren't going to be stored either way. In fact it's even more ridiculous and annoying that they need to store a goddamn cookie or fingerprint me to remember that I declined, which of course doesn't get stored on my end, and results in the stupid dialog box appearing every time I visit the site.
You know where I really hate tech companies and consent? Asking for phone numbers for SMS confirmations. No thanks. You don't need my phone number to do business with me. Just the other day a goddamn restaurant needed a phone number to order food in person at the restaurant via their abomination of a QR code at the table and a mobile webpage ordering system.
- olivierduval 4y agoWatch out, cookie consent is more than just cookies: it's about keeping and exploitable your personal datas! When you accept cookies, you accept that the provider can use and sell your datas... so even if you automatically erase the cookie, it's only the tip of the iceberg GDPR is way larger than just cookies...
- Rygian 4y agoWhen you instruct your browser to accept cookies for the few websites you log into, your browser is unable to limit acceptance only to the cookies that are strictly mandatory for proper functioning. Instead, your browser will accept any cookie, including unnecessary ones, because it can't tell the difference. Therefore, you cannot enforce consent at the browser level.
- closeparen 4y agoSession cookies and user accounts are obviously not necessary for the proper functioning of discussion boards - 4chan is one of the most popular in the world. Shall we haul the Hacker News admins off to jail? I'm not trying to be cheeky here. Who can say what the "necessary" and "proper" functioning of a given website is? You can always imagine a similar-but-different website. I think usually people are talking about ad-related stuff, but then why not regulate that in particular?