8 ms·

The EU, which brought us the cookie-consent-window. Yeah, and they are totally not fools, of course.

by lynx23 3y ago

hef19898 3y ago
If all you took away from GDPR is cookie consent pop-ups, than, well maybe not the EU are the fools...
- j_maffe 3y ago
  GP just sees the world with what comes up in front of them. They see popups and they think that's what GDPR is.
  - lynx23 3y ago
    Wrong. I know what GDPR is, and I support it. But I dont like the cookie-content window implementation since it breaks the flow of browsing.
    - fsflover 3y ago
      This implementation wasn't demanded in the law.
  - lynx23 3y ago
    No, GP doesn't "see" the world at all, GP is blind. Its fascinating how many pro-EU people get aggressive if they are confronted with others not being happy. Let me guess, while we are at unspecific accusations: Are you british perhaps?
Keyframe 3y ago
And usb-c on an iphone. Alas, despite consent windows on web, GDPR has been overall good.
- joshstrange 3y ago
  I seriously don’t understand how people can say that with a straight face. Apple was arguably one of the first companies to push hard on USB-C and anyone could see that they were going to bring it to the iPhone within a couple years of when the EU “forced“ them to do it.
  - j_maffe 3y ago
    Do you have any sources from Apple for this before the EU regulation discussion started? Could you Sounds like a "yeah we always wanted to do this anyway we swear we were gonna stop selling proprietary chargers soon".
    - joshstrange 3y ago
      gestures wildly at every other Apple products that switched over Apple said from the start of Lightning (which was and is heads and shoulders above micro-USB) that they planned for it to last as long as the 30-pin connector and it did. People complained when we went from 30-pin to Lightning and they complained when Apple went from Lightning to USB-C. As a tech nerd I wish they had moved the phone (or at least the Pro version) to USB-C sooner but I understand why they didn’t. You all act like we had to be “saved from Lightning”, regular people don’t care, they liked Lightning, I liked Lightning. Micro-USB is trash, I can see wanting to escape that hell, Lightning wasn’t a problem for the vast majority of people. And before “but they made money off MFI”, I don’t care. It was a drop in the bucket revenue-wise for them and meant that your Lightning cables has a minimum standard they would be held to. Something I can’t say for my other cables.
      - j_maffe 3y ago
        With all due respect, legislature will be passed whether you care about it or not and irrespective of what percentage of the population even knows what a lightning charger is or isn't. Besides the proprietary equipment, it was causing a sizable amount of electronic waste. I don't see what you're so angry about. Again you have not given any source stating that Apple was going to switch to USB-C by itself. (even if they did 10 years from now the EU made them speed it up which is notable)
MatekCopatek 3y ago
The cookie consent window is just a lazy way of how most developers decided to handle the regulation. This might vary from country to country, depending on how exactly each EU member implemented it, but where I live, you didn't have to ask permission for cookies related to core functionality (e.g. basket state in a webshop). IIRC you were even able to get away with light tracking, if it supported your main usecase (e.g. counting product views to generate a list of most viewed products) and didn't expose the data to a 3rd party service. But yeah, it's much easier to keep sending all the user data to Google Analytics and complain about the EU forcing you into spammy cookie consent windows then it is to understand what the legislation is trying to achieve and reduce the amount of data you're collecting.
- kwhitefoot 3y ago
  It's not just lazy. Many such pop-ups deliberately misinform the user.
- unmole 3y ago
  Even the EU's own website has a cookie banner: https://european-union.europa.eu https://european-union.europa.eu The only thing that stupid rule achieved is to make the web ever so slightly annoying to use.
  - j_maffe 3y ago
    It allows people to say no and maintain their private data. Privacy might be meaningless to you but it's important for a lot of people and if browsing will be slightly more annoying to use due to malicious compliance by some websites, so be it.
- lynx23 3y ago
  I understand the intent, and support it. However, the implementation with the consent window just breaks the flow of browsing. It is also pretty much broken when it comes to accessibility and screen readers. On most platforms I know, you can scroll past the content window, since it is only impelemtned with a div overlaying the rest of the site. Screen readers mostly have no problem scrolling past this overlay. I know, because I use screen readers.
kwhitefoot 3y ago
No they didn't. That was just sites that wanted to get permission for information not needed for the running of the application.
ordu 3y ago
Yeah, now you can see when a site wants to sell your data to Google.
alpaca128 3y ago
Don't blame the messenger. There would be no cookie consent banners if websites would use cookies strictly in your interest.
sebastiennight 3y ago
I went to a spa with a friend (who's a member) the other day, and to get inside as a paying customer, these people require a facial recognition scan and a fingerprint. If you don't think there's a problem with that (and the inevitable leak of those tens of thousand of collected biometrics within a couple years), then you probably can't see what GDPR really is for.
fennecbutt 3y ago
Tbf that should have counted as malicious compliance, especially with the way most dialogues try to trick you into accepting cookies, or making you have to disable two dozen cookies with individual checkboxes.

The EU, which brought us the cookie-consent-window. Yeah, and they are totally not fools, of course.

by lynx23 3y ago

The EU, which brought us the cookie-consent-window. Yeah, and they are totally not fools, of course.

hef19898 3y ago

If all you took away from GDPR is cookie consent pop-ups, than, well maybe not the EU are the fools...

j_maffe 3y ago
GP just sees the world with what comes up in front of them. They see popups and they think that's what GDPR is.
- lynx23 3y ago
  Wrong. I know what GDPR is, and I support it. But I dont like the cookie-content window implementation since it breaks the flow of browsing.
  - fsflover 3y ago
    This implementation wasn't demanded in the law.
- lynx23 3y ago
  No, GP doesn't "see" the world at all, GP is blind. Its fascinating how many pro-EU people get aggressive if they are confronted with others not being happy. Let me guess, while we are at unspecific accusations: Are you british perhaps?

Keyframe 3y ago

And usb-c on an iphone. Alas, despite consent windows on web, GDPR has been overall good.

joshstrange 3y ago
I seriously don’t understand how people can say that with a straight face. Apple was arguably one of the first companies to push hard on USB-C and anyone could see that they were going to bring it to the iPhone within a couple years of when the EU “forced“ them to do it.
- j_maffe 3y ago
  Do you have any sources from Apple for this before the EU regulation discussion started? Could you Sounds like a "yeah we always wanted to do this anyway we swear we were gonna stop selling proprietary chargers soon".
  - joshstrange 3y ago
    gestures wildly at every other Apple products that switched over Apple said from the start of Lightning (which was and is heads and shoulders above micro-USB) that they planned for it to last as long as the 30-pin connector and it did. People complained when we went from 30-pin to Lightning and they complained when Apple went from Lightning to USB-C. As a tech nerd I wish they had moved the phone (or at least the Pro version) to USB-C sooner but I understand why they didn’t. You all act like we had to be “saved from Lightning”, regular people don’t care, they liked Lightning, I liked Lightning. Micro-USB is trash, I can see wanting to escape that hell, Lightning wasn’t a problem for the vast majority of people. And before “but they made money off MFI”, I don’t care. It was a drop in the bucket revenue-wise for them and meant that your Lightning cables has a minimum standard they would be held to. Something I can’t say for my other cables.
    - j_maffe 3y ago
      With all due respect, legislature will be passed whether you care about it or not and irrespective of what percentage of the population even knows what a lightning charger is or isn't. Besides the proprietary equipment, it was causing a sizable amount of electronic waste. I don't see what you're so angry about. Again you have not given any source stating that Apple was going to switch to USB-C by itself. (even if they did 10 years from now the EU made them speed it up which is notable)

MatekCopatek 3y ago

The cookie consent window is just a lazy way of how most developers decided to handle the regulation. This might vary from country to country, depending on how exactly each EU member implemented it, but where I live, you didn't have to ask permission for cookies related to core functionality (e.g. basket state in a webshop). IIRC you were even able to get away with light tracking, if it supported your main usecase (e.g. counting product views to generate a list of most viewed products) and didn't expose the data to a 3rd party service. But yeah, it's much easier to keep sending all the user data to Google Analytics and complain about the EU forcing you into spammy cookie consent windows then it is to understand what the legislation is trying to achieve and reduce the amount of data you're collecting.

kwhitefoot 3y ago
It's not just lazy. Many such pop-ups deliberately misinform the user.
unmole 3y ago
Even the EU's own website has a cookie banner: https://european-union.europa.eu https://european-union.europa.eu The only thing that stupid rule achieved is to make the web ever so slightly annoying to use.
- j_maffe 3y ago
  It allows people to say no and maintain their private data. Privacy might be meaningless to you but it's important for a lot of people and if browsing will be slightly more annoying to use due to malicious compliance by some websites, so be it.
lynx23 3y ago
I understand the intent, and support it. However, the implementation with the consent window just breaks the flow of browsing. It is also pretty much broken when it comes to accessibility and screen readers. On most platforms I know, you can scroll past the content window, since it is only impelemtned with a div overlaying the rest of the site. Screen readers mostly have no problem scrolling past this overlay. I know, because I use screen readers.

kwhitefoot 3y ago

No they didn't. That was just sites that wanted to get permission for information not needed for the running of the application.

ordu 3y ago

Yeah, now you can see when a site wants to sell your data to Google.

alpaca128 3y ago

Don't blame the messenger. There would be no cookie consent banners if websites would use cookies strictly in your interest.

sebastiennight 3y ago

I went to a spa with a friend (who's a member) the other day, and to get inside as a paying customer, these people require a facial recognition scan and a fingerprint. If you don't think there's a problem with that (and the inevitable leak of those tens of thousand of collected biometrics within a couple years), then you probably can't see what GDPR really is for.

fennecbutt 3y ago

Tbf that should have counted as malicious compliance, especially with the way most dialogues try to trick you into accepting cookies, or making you have to disable two dozen cookies with individual checkboxes.