4 ms·
I don't think the cookie thing is malicious compliance though, considering every single company dealt with it in the same way. There are armies of product peopl
by bko 2y ago
I don't think the cookie thing is malicious compliance though, considering every single company dealt with it in the same way. There are armies of product people that obsess over the tiniest details of these products, to think that, across the board, all companies would accept this giant ugly invasive cookie banner on their site to stick it to European authorities just strikes me as unlikely.
In terms of facebook blocking Canadian media, its just not worth it to them. Presumably they crunched the numbers and decided sharing revenue with them isn't worth the hassle or the lost traffic, so they chose not to do so.
- lesuorac 2y agoYou're welcome to read the ePrivacy Directive [1] [2]. It makes no mention of a full page banner that requires interaction before reading a webpage. Every company implementing something a certain way should be really believable though. It's a compliance feature so you want to implement it the same way as everybody else so if a regulator complains you can point to everybody else as a defense. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPrivacy_Directive#Cookies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPrivacy_Directive#Cookies [2]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002L0058:en:HTML https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX...