5 ms·

Will this make annoying cookie banners go away?

7734128 3y ago
We'll probably either be forced to agree to be tracked by Google's systems or forced to sign in to every page. There's no chance that anything positive will ever happen with the web again, it has gotten worse at every step for more than a decade. Especially when Google has any involvement with it.
- parineum 3y ago
  All the things that led to getting rid of flash player have been pretty great. CSS is pretty incredible compared to what it used to be. JavaScript is still a train wreck but web assembly holds some promise there. WebGL is also pretty great.
  - fyokdrigd 3y ago
    and all that still didn't give you the creative web that flash allowed.
- dangus 3y ago
  I’m confused at where we jump to the conclusion that we’ll be forced to sign in to Google’s systems or sign in to every page. How specifically does that come about?
  - GenerocUsername 3y ago
    Hi. I work in web and was on the analytics team for a major Canadian based retailer. The death of cookies is absolutely a corporate level driver for the push to authenticate. Trackers being unable to stash long ttl cookies is being replaced by reliable ways to reidentify people... such as logging in.
    - amf12 3y ago
      But you can still store trackers right? Just not cross reference the tracking cookie with the cookie from other domains.
    - eslaught 3y ago
      I can see this if you go from site X to site Y where you're logged in on both X and Y, and you can correlate (say) the email. But if you're logged into Y (the store) but not X some random referrer, how do you attribute the conversion?
      - ilammy 3y ago
        You will be kindly asked to log in with Google everywhere, for your convenience and security.
underdeserver 3y ago
I don't think so - those would be first-party cookies.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Most cookies in those popups are third-party cookies, at least for websites with giant lists of third party cookies that require Consent-O-Matic to properly disable. Website relying on first-party cookies are usually rather unobtrusive,
  - youngtaff 3y ago
    They’re for cookies that are set in the first party context i.e. a third-party script sets a cookie on the first part origin Safari stopped supporting third-party origins setting cookies on themselves many years ago
  - underdeserver 3y ago
    I meant that most sites have first-party cookies (whether or not they have third-party cookies) and you'll still need the banner for those.
0x073 3y ago
No
wilde 3y ago
Nope. Those are permanently part of the internet now, even if the reason for their existence goes away.
jefftk 3y ago
No. Cookie banners cover any use of client size storage. That includes things like shopping carts and personalization (purely first party), analytics ("first party"), and ads (usually "third party"). Part of what's confusing here is that "first party" and "third party" are being used in a technical sense to mean which domain the cookies are set on. If on an example.com page JS from example.net causes a cookie to be set on example.com that's "first party", while if the cookie is set on any other domain that's "third party".
- Nextgrid 3y ago
  Shopping carts (and other purely-functional, essential purposes) do not require a consent popup.
  - jefftk 3y ago
    Shopping carts require cookies if they go beyond what is "strictly necessary to provide a service explicitly requested by the user". This is quite a high bar, and most shopping cart implementations do not meet it. For example, if you put something in your cart on Monday but then don't purchase, it is not strictly necessary that it still be in your cart should you return on Tuesday to complete your purchase, so holding it overnight requires consent. I wrote more about this in https://www.jefftk.com/p/why-so-many-cookie-banners https://www.jefftk.com/p/why-so-many-cookie-banners and the relevant guidelines are section 2.3 of https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2012/wp194_en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinio...
    - Nextgrid 3y ago
      Thanks for the explanation - you learn something new every day. You should still be able to avoid a banner by having a footnote below the “add to cart” such as “we’ll set a cookie to remember this according to our cookie policy [link]”?
      - jefftk 3y ago
janosd 3y ago
No. The cookie banners have nothing to do with cookies per se, they are a consent / information popup required if companies want to store and use personal data beyond what's required to serve you with the website content (GDPR) or they want to store non-essential identifiers on your device (ePrivacy directive). In other words, you are seeing these because marketing departments need BS metrics that measure nothing and are based on some personal data. The internet can happily exist without them as proven by Github[1]. [1] https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/ https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/

We'll probably either be forced to agree to be tracked by Google's systems or forced to sign in to every page. There's no chance that anything positive will ever happen with the web again, it has gotten worse at every step for more than a decade. Especially when Google has any involvement with it.

parineum 3y ago
All the things that led to getting rid of flash player have been pretty great. CSS is pretty incredible compared to what it used to be. JavaScript is still a train wreck but web assembly holds some promise there. WebGL is also pretty great.
- fyokdrigd 3y ago
  and all that still didn't give you the creative web that flash allowed.
dangus 3y ago
I’m confused at where we jump to the conclusion that we’ll be forced to sign in to Google’s systems or sign in to every page. How specifically does that come about?
- GenerocUsername 3y ago
  Hi. I work in web and was on the analytics team for a major Canadian based retailer. The death of cookies is absolutely a corporate level driver for the push to authenticate. Trackers being unable to stash long ttl cookies is being replaced by reliable ways to reidentify people... such as logging in.
  - amf12 3y ago
    But you can still store trackers right? Just not cross reference the tracking cookie with the cookie from other domains.
  - eslaught 3y ago
    I can see this if you go from site X to site Y where you're logged in on both X and Y, and you can correlate (say) the email. But if you're logged into Y (the store) but not X some random referrer, how do you attribute the conversion?
    - ilammy 3y ago
      You will be kindly asked to log in with Google everywhere, for your convenience and security.

underdeserver 3y ago

I don't think so - those would be first-party cookies.

jeroenhd 3y ago
Most cookies in those popups are third-party cookies, at least for websites with giant lists of third party cookies that require Consent-O-Matic to properly disable. Website relying on first-party cookies are usually rather unobtrusive,
- youngtaff 3y ago
  They’re for cookies that are set in the first party context i.e. a third-party script sets a cookie on the first part origin Safari stopped supporting third-party origins setting cookies on themselves many years ago
- underdeserver 3y ago
  I meant that most sites have first-party cookies (whether or not they have third-party cookies) and you'll still need the banner for those.

0x073 3y ago

wilde 3y ago

Nope. Those are permanently part of the internet now, even if the reason for their existence goes away.

jefftk 3y ago

No. Cookie banners cover any use of client size storage. That includes things like shopping carts and personalization (purely first party), analytics ("first party"), and ads (usually "third party"). Part of what's confusing here is that "first party" and "third party" are being used in a technical sense to mean which domain the cookies are set on. If on an example.com page JS from example.net causes a cookie to be set on example.com that's "first party", while if the cookie is set on any other domain that's "third party".

Nextgrid 3y ago
Shopping carts (and other purely-functional, essential purposes) do not require a consent popup.
- jefftk 3y ago
  Shopping carts require cookies if they go beyond what is "strictly necessary to provide a service explicitly requested by the user". This is quite a high bar, and most shopping cart implementations do not meet it. For example, if you put something in your cart on Monday but then don't purchase, it is not strictly necessary that it still be in your cart should you return on Tuesday to complete your purchase, so holding it overnight requires consent. I wrote more about this in https://www.jefftk.com/p/why-so-many-cookie-banners https://www.jefftk.com/p/why-so-many-cookie-banners and the relevant guidelines are section 2.3 of https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2012/wp194_en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinio...
  - Nextgrid 3y ago
    Thanks for the explanation - you learn something new every day. You should still be able to avoid a banner by having a footnote below the “add to cart” such as “we’ll set a cookie to remember this according to our cookie policy [link]”?
    - jefftk 3y ago

janosd 3y ago

No. The cookie banners have nothing to do with cookies per se, they are a consent / information popup required if companies want to store and use personal data beyond what's required to serve you with the website content (GDPR) or they want to store non-essential identifiers on your device (ePrivacy directive). In other words, you are seeing these because marketing departments need BS metrics that measure nothing and are based on some personal data. The internet can happily exist without them as proven by Github[1]. [1] https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/ https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/