4 ms·

I feel like "it doesn't work as intended so it never will, do not try" - an argument very frequently said by cynics, is the antithesis of the indomitable human

by clnq 3y ago

I feel like "it doesn't work as intended so it never will, do not try" - an argument very frequently said by cynics, is the antithesis of the indomitable human spirit and human achievement. It's very harmful to anyone trying to do anything challenging. Imagine if this was one of the principal virtues in human civilizations. Where would humanity be? Would we know the Earth is round and not the centre of the universe? Would we have vaccines or antibiotics? Would we have most of our art and literature? Would simple technologies like irrigation even exist? We would probably not have any advancements past about middle ages. I don't understand why so many cynics tell this to others these days. Do they genuinely have a mindset that nothing is worth trying if it failed the first time?

LawTalkingGuy 3y ago
> Do they genuinely have a mindset that nothing is worth trying if it failed the first time? No. But the way you first picked to do the thing is very likely impossible to make work. Don't decide on a mechanism, like cookies, and fixate on it without regard for practicality or effectiveness. Preventing invisible tracking is probably a good goal that's worth iterating on but making sites pop up a list of good and bad tracking and being allowed to track the people who accidentally don't click "No!" seems like an entirely failed way to go about this. If tracking is bad then stop it for everyone, not just people who clicked the correct thing. If some tracking is generally bad but allowable for certain functionality then mandate that tracking is only applied once the user had opted in, etc. Don't make users mark "Don't steal my organs while I sleep" on the hotel paperwork.
- clnq 3y ago
  > No. But the way you first picked to do the thing is very likely impossible to make work. Don't decide on a mechanism, like cookies, and fixate on it without regard for practicality or effectiveness. GDPR is not about cookies. Cookies are mentioned only once in the entire legal text as an example of a technology that can be used to associate users with personally identifiable data. If there is no risk for this association, GDPR does not care about cookies. GDPR is about ethically acquiring and handling personal data.

by clnq 3y ago

LawTalkingGuy 3y ago

> Do they genuinely have a mindset that nothing is worth trying if it failed the first time? No. But the way you first picked to do the thing is very likely impossible to make work. Don't decide on a mechanism, like cookies, and fixate on it without regard for practicality or effectiveness. Preventing invisible tracking is probably a good goal that's worth iterating on but making sites pop up a list of good and bad tracking and being allowed to track the people who accidentally don't click "No!" seems like an entirely failed way to go about this. If tracking is bad then stop it for everyone, not just people who clicked the correct thing. If some tracking is generally bad but allowable for certain functionality then mandate that tracking is only applied once the user had opted in, etc. Don't make users mark "Don't steal my organs while I sleep" on the hotel paperwork.

clnq 3y ago
> No. But the way you first picked to do the thing is very likely impossible to make work. Don't decide on a mechanism, like cookies, and fixate on it without regard for practicality or effectiveness. GDPR is not about cookies. Cookies are mentioned only once in the entire legal text as an example of a technology that can be used to associate users with personally identifiable data. If there is no risk for this association, GDPR does not care about cookies. GDPR is about ethically acquiring and handling personal data.