3 ms·

Cookie dialogs easily avoided wherever companies care about their customers/users.

• IshKebab 1y ago
  Is this the sort of naive reasoning that led to the law in the first place?
  • 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.
  • account42 1y ago
    And what lead to the banners is the knowledge that people like you would blame the law instead of the companies.
• bmacho 1y ago
  And they are getting better. I don't remember when was the last time a cookie dialogue forced me to uncheck 10+ switches, and making me angry that they give my browsing history to 1000+ random ad companies--I unironically miss that daily dosage of anger (against ad people and not the EU). Most of them are one-click nowadays, just as intended. (Still bad on phones tho, especially javascript disabled.)
  • IshKebab 1y ago
    Yeah now they say "accept all or subscribe". Much better!
    • bmacho 1y ago
      Example?
      • IshKebab 1y ago
        The Guardian does this now.
    • mafuy 1y ago
      There has been a lawsuit over that, I've not heard of its result yet.
• pjc50 1y ago
  https://commission.europa.eu/index_en https://commission.europa.eu/index_en : cookie banner. Can you find any big sites that don't have one? They're effectively a mandatory CYA, the Prop 65 warning of websites.