7 ms·

I don't know, before going after that, maybe go after all of the popups you created that are not in the spirit of letting you control who you share your browsin

I don't know, before going after that, maybe go after all of the popups you created that are not in the spirit of letting you control who you share your browsing data with. To consent to sharing, I just have to click the consent button. To reject sharing, I need to a) click the manage options button b) click the reject all button (if there is such a button) c) avoid the "agree to all and confirm" button that is somehow now highlighted as if that would be the logical next button to click after I rejected all d) click on the "save changes" button, which is really helpfully titled, and greyed out, but thankfully still clickable e) pray that all of that made a difference

rcxdude 2y ago
Indeed, it is something regulators should be hotter on, because that is not only breaking the spirit but the letter. I think they've been trying to go after the bigger fish in this regard (notice that google's box at least has one click to say no now), but it'll take some time for it to filter downwards, and still people will cargo-cult the pop-ups even if they don't actually need them (which, for the average wordpress blog, you don't).
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
Some companies were already fined for not having the opt out be just as easy as the opt-in; may many more follow.
natch 2y ago
You are talking about the popups created by European lawmakers? Yes these are the worst thing to happen to the web in recent memory.
- jkaplowitz 2y ago
  None of those popups are required by European lawmakers. Websites don’t need to ask for permission for the essential cookies like what’s necessary to log into an online account or add items to a shopping cart - indeed, many compliant EU cookie popups have “only essential cookies” as the least permissive option. They only need to ask for permission if they want consent for the kind of invasive tracking that the GDPR and related regulations were intended to discourage anyway. And they aren’t required to use popups or banners to get any consent they might need. The popups, and especially the quite probably legally invalid common implementation where granting consent is made easier than refusing it, are a frequently bad-faith attempt by the industry to continue tracking-centric business as fully as possible contrary to the policy intention of the GDPR. They are not a requirement of the law.
  - f1shy 2y ago
    Dont ask me why. But that idiotic pop ups come even in the internal portal in out company… is a disaster. Yes they are not required, but OBVIOUSLY are there to make us crazy and make us click whatever make them disappear faster. An nobody is doing NOTHING after years…
    - diggan 2y ago
      > But that idiotic pop ups come even in the internal portal in out company Wow, talk about misunderstanding how that works. I hope it's not a company based within the EU because if they're so clueless about the regulations they have to follow, I'd be confident they're breaking a multitude of other laws (accidentally most likely).
      - f1shy 2y ago
        Yes. Is EU!!! And it drives me crazy. Totally internal page, only seen by employees. Beyond comprehension.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Legislators don't get to dodge the natural consequences of their legislation. This wasn't an unexpected side effect, it's the only possible outcome of the bill in the world as it actually exists. Laws should not be written for spherical humans, they should be written for the real-world humans who actively circumvent laws where they can get away with it. And when legislation makes the world worse for everyone because it encourages self-interested individuals and companies to act in a way that is annoying or harmful, legislators don't get to dodge responsibility by saying that it's their fault and they should have just done the right thing. We have laws precisely because people can't be counted on to do the right thing.
    - natch 2y ago
      Agree, and on topic of Apple, this is also a perfect response to why many of Europe’s regulations against Apple are so bad. Not all of them; I don’t have an issue with requiring the use of one charging cable standard, but the privacy and user safety side effects of the legislated undermining of security cannot be ignored.
adolph 2y ago
Maybe EU is big mad at Apple because that "Hide Distracting Items" feature of iOS Safari makes those popups go "boom" when they disappear. No need to click through N different popup paths. One method and a satisfactory animation.
orangepanda 2y ago
Dont forget the hidden legitimate interest section!
ksk23 2y ago
Give noyb your money if you have some to spare maybe - might be getting there sometime..
Havoc 2y ago
The darkpatterny malicious compliance approach to consent buttons is very much the companies doing not the EU‘s. At most we can blame the EU for naive assumption that companies would act in somewhat good faith. These flows irritate me too though and hopefully we’ll see additional enforcement of it
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
A typical HN reply will try to blame the user or regulators seeking to protect privacy and minimise damage from data breaches. It will ignore that the company collecting data from and about users for profit is the root cause of the problem. The company refuses to stop coillecting data. HN replies will often allege Apple does not care about collecting data because it is not in the online ad services business. If that was true, then there would be no harm in stopping the data collection. A read through Apple's latest 10K will suggest Apple is in fact in the online ads business and it is growing. The data collection will continue. "Services net sales increased during 2024 compared to 2023 due primarily to higher net sales from advertising, the App Store and cloud services." https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/c87043b9-5d89-4717-9f49-c4f9663d0061.pdf https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/c87043b...
margana 2y ago
Ah, can trust HN to always derail the topic whenever EU is mentioned. This has literally nothing to do with the subject matter of the article.

rcxdude 2y ago

Indeed, it is something regulators should be hotter on, because that is not only breaking the spirit but the letter. I think they've been trying to go after the bigger fish in this regard (notice that google's box at least has one click to say no now), but it'll take some time for it to filter downwards, and still people will cargo-cult the pop-ups even if they don't actually need them (which, for the average wordpress blog, you don't).

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

Some companies were already fined for not having the opt out be just as easy as the opt-in; may many more follow.

natch 2y ago

You are talking about the popups created by European lawmakers? Yes these are the worst thing to happen to the web in recent memory.

jkaplowitz 2y ago
None of those popups are required by European lawmakers. Websites don’t need to ask for permission for the essential cookies like what’s necessary to log into an online account or add items to a shopping cart - indeed, many compliant EU cookie popups have “only essential cookies” as the least permissive option. They only need to ask for permission if they want consent for the kind of invasive tracking that the GDPR and related regulations were intended to discourage anyway. And they aren’t required to use popups or banners to get any consent they might need. The popups, and especially the quite probably legally invalid common implementation where granting consent is made easier than refusing it, are a frequently bad-faith attempt by the industry to continue tracking-centric business as fully as possible contrary to the policy intention of the GDPR. They are not a requirement of the law.
- f1shy 2y ago
  Dont ask me why. But that idiotic pop ups come even in the internal portal in out company… is a disaster. Yes they are not required, but OBVIOUSLY are there to make us crazy and make us click whatever make them disappear faster. An nobody is doing NOTHING after years…
  - diggan 2y ago
    > But that idiotic pop ups come even in the internal portal in out company Wow, talk about misunderstanding how that works. I hope it's not a company based within the EU because if they're so clueless about the regulations they have to follow, I'd be confident they're breaking a multitude of other laws (accidentally most likely).
    - f1shy 2y ago
      Yes. Is EU!!! And it drives me crazy. Totally internal page, only seen by employees. Beyond comprehension.
- lolinder 2y ago
  Legislators don't get to dodge the natural consequences of their legislation. This wasn't an unexpected side effect, it's the only possible outcome of the bill in the world as it actually exists. Laws should not be written for spherical humans, they should be written for the real-world humans who actively circumvent laws where they can get away with it. And when legislation makes the world worse for everyone because it encourages self-interested individuals and companies to act in a way that is annoying or harmful, legislators don't get to dodge responsibility by saying that it's their fault and they should have just done the right thing. We have laws precisely because people can't be counted on to do the right thing.
  - natch 2y ago
    Agree, and on topic of Apple, this is also a perfect response to why many of Europe’s regulations against Apple are so bad. Not all of them; I don’t have an issue with requiring the use of one charging cable standard, but the privacy and user safety side effects of the legislated undermining of security cannot be ignored.

adolph 2y ago

Maybe EU is big mad at Apple because that "Hide Distracting Items" feature of iOS Safari makes those popups go "boom" when they disappear. No need to click through N different popup paths. One method and a satisfactory animation.

orangepanda 2y ago

Dont forget the hidden legitimate interest section!

ksk23 2y ago

Give noyb your money if you have some to spare maybe - might be getting there sometime..

Havoc 2y ago

The darkpatterny malicious compliance approach to consent buttons is very much the companies doing not the EU‘s. At most we can blame the EU for naive assumption that companies would act in somewhat good faith. These flows irritate me too though and hopefully we’ll see additional enforcement of it

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

A typical HN reply will try to blame the user or regulators seeking to protect privacy and minimise damage from data breaches. It will ignore that the company collecting data from and about users for profit is the root cause of the problem. The company refuses to stop coillecting data. HN replies will often allege Apple does not care about collecting data because it is not in the online ad services business. If that was true, then there would be no harm in stopping the data collection. A read through Apple's latest 10K will suggest Apple is in fact in the online ads business and it is growing. The data collection will continue. "Services net sales increased during 2024 compared to 2023 due primarily to higher net sales from advertising, the App Store and cloud services." https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/c87043b9-5d89-4717-9f49-c4f9663d0061.pdf https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/c87043b...

margana 2y ago

Ah, can trust HN to always derail the topic whenever EU is mentioned. This has literally nothing to do with the subject matter of the article.