3 ms·
and to be clear, the european attitude to this regulation would be, "try again, better this time" not ah yes, let's go back to having no regulation of corps tr
by mjburgess 3y ago
and to be clear, the european attitude to this regulation would be, "try again, better this time"
not ah yes, let's go back to having no regulation of corps tracking people.
People would be quite enthusiastic to more regulation which required no cookie banners where users had, eg., expressed a preference for no tracking at the browser level. And likewise, to require the provision of such "no-tracking signals".
I suspect something like this is on the horizon, and in part, something google was trying to head-off with its 3rd party cookies stuff.
"more, better!"
- interactivecode 3y ago> "try again, better this time" this is so true and kind of hilarious to see Americans not understand this. When a regulation happens and it's day to day effects are not working out great. The answer will always be to regulate more, add more rules and restrict things more. The EU is inclined not to create regulations at first. They prefer to hold meetings, seminars and inform companies of their effects to encourage them to self regulate. If after years this does not help they will either: A) create subsidies to help companies implement changes. but only if they have shown they are will to interact with the EU governing bodies. or B) Add rules and regulations to force companies to act a certain way. The beautiful disconnect pointed out in the article where Apple thinks the meetings are negotiation and EU is basically showing that their smiles and friendly words are just formalities and change is happening no matter what Apple thinks or not.
- juanpicardo 3y agoThis is particularly true in the case of Cookie Banners. regulation has been clarified and now most sites do have a explicit "reject all" button/link that is next to "accept all". This was not the case when the law was first introduced.