2 ms·
The EU didn't force the banners. They restricted opt-out data collection without consent, which is a good thing to do. The banners is malicious compliance.
by fsflover 1y ago
The EU didn't force the banners. They restricted opt-out data collection without consent, which is a good thing to do. The banners is malicious compliance.
- PaulHoule 1y agoConsent for privacy is a broken model. It needs to be "Respect DNT or go to directly to jail, do not pass Go" It's a predictable result and if the EU is not "consenting" with it they should change the law.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bmn__ 1y ago> It needs to be [heavy-handed reprimands] What is the realistic chance for such a regulation to pass all hurdles before being signed/coming into effect?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- orangecat 1y agoThe banners is malicious compliance. That's true, but I'm still going to blame the EU. The nag screens were absolutely a predictable response, and if the regulators didn't spend half an hour thinking about unscrupulous data marketers would react to the regulations, then they are bad at their jobs. And even after that, they've had years to fix the regulations and haven't done so.