3 ms·

I think the goal was to give citizens the possibility to make informed decisions about where their personal data is being used. If you don't care about trackin

I think the goal was to give citizens the possibility to make informed decisions about where their personal data is being used. If you don't care about tracking, ok. But some do. The EU tried to cater to both audiences which I think is fair. Turns out most people that did not care about tracking would also not consent when they are asked about it specifically and there are no immediately perceived downsides visible.

arrowsmith 3y ago
> informed decisions And therein lies the false premise that makes the whole thing absurd. Most people have no idea what "cookies" are, don't understand what difference it makes when you reject them, and are never going to learn - and we shouldn't expect them to! Leave the technical stuff for the programmers. The cookie law only makes sense if you think that there's any significant overlap between "people who understand what cookies are" and "people who need help with internet privacy", for which I refer you to the Venn diagram in this comic: https://churchm.ag/eu-cookie-law-history/ https://churchm.ag/eu-cookie-law-history/
- master-lincoln 3y ago
  There is no cookie law. There is a law that makes companies ask for consent when they share personal data or store identifiers that make this possible. If companies wouldn't try to frame the whole thing in technicalities, it could be a simple popup listing the features on the website that need sharing personal info and users could turn that off.