7 ms·
IANAL but my understanding is that if a cookie is strictly necessary for functionality (such as a login token or storing the region the user explicitly selected
by the8472 3y ago
IANAL but my understanding is that if a cookie is strictly necessary for functionality (such as a login token or storing the region the user explicitly selected) then no consent is needed.
"improve performance and UX using simple analytics" I don't see how performance requires persistent analytics. This smells like a flimsy justification or perhaps "we always did it this way" rather than strict technical necessity.
You can send events from a current session without keeping state in the client. And if one truly cared about performance, there's a lot of fat to trim from many commercial webpages that shouldn't require any analytics at all, try opening a profiler first and notice how much time is spent on loading all the analytics stuff.
- sokoloff 3y agoI think you might be reading improve performance to mean “page speed optimization” rather than “profit making optimization”.
- midjji 3y agoThis is correct, its not needed for good performance, and most things websites require cookies for dont require the disclaimer, with two caveats. First its pretty clear from the law what requires it, but what if you are wrong, what if corp requires legal to sign off on the engineers statement that it is legal, its not like you gain much from not having the disclaimer, and second, most freemium analytics (e.g. googles) and all ad related services do require it.
- lupusreal 3y ago> its not like you gain much from not having the disclaimer Then the "popups" (which aren't actually popups) aren't actually as onerous to users as the web developers on HN would have us believe. Seriously, I never hear common people complain about it, only people in the industry who have a commercial stake in tracking people without consent