3 ms·

Advertisers chose to ignore DNT because they claimed Microsoft making DNT enabled by default took agency away from the user. In reality, they probably weren't g

by LocalH 5mo ago

Advertisers chose to ignore DNT because they claimed Microsoft making DNT enabled by default took agency away from the user. In reality, they probably weren't going to honor it anyway.

mmooss 5mo ago
Microsoft is too sophisticated to plead ignorance; they are responsible for that outcome and I think we can assume they knowningly chose it. (Though now Microsoft browsers are such a small portion of the market that it doesn't matter.) The biggest failure of DNT was browser makers - including Mozilla - removing it. It has zero performance impact (1 bit?) or development cost. As long as it was out there, when there was momentum against tracking, advocates had evidence of both demand for privacy and of trackers ignoring user wishes.
- applfanboysbgon 5mo ago
  > advocates had evidence of both demand for privacy and of trackers ignoring user wishes. This evidence both still exists and is also completely useless for anything. The more important consideration, by far, is that the DNT flag was actively harmful to users in the real world because, if it was acknowledged at all, it was used maliciously to help fingerprint and track users. There is no reason for browsers to continue providing to their users a toggle that not only misleads them about what will happen with the setting enabled, but actively contributes to the opposite outcome because we live in a world where being evil is the norm.
- dylan604 5mo ago
  Lately, I've come across websites that instead of a cookie banner display a banner that states they recognize and honor my wish to not be tracked. Whether that really do or not is something I did not spend time looking into. The first time I saw it I thought it was a fluke, and then it happened a few more times with in a short time period. Couldn't tell you what sites they were though as it was just something from search results.
  - mmooss 5mo ago
    Wow. I've never seen that. It would be great if it became more widespread. But isn't DNT deprecated in most browsers? Maybe I misremember.
    - dylan604 5mo ago
      ::shrug:: I set it a long time ago and never looked back. I never looked into it being deprecated, but I knew that pretty much everyone ignored it for reasons. But by these banners, I'm guessing it still lives on as a setting.
      - LocalH 5mo ago
        Advertisers ignored it because MS decided to turn it into opt-in instead of opt-out, and advertisers very much hate opt-in. They'd much rather require the most permissive defaults, and put every barrier they can in front of opting out.
        mmooss 5mo ago
        Users usually don't know about or change settings, so opt-out often means little. What portion of users knows about DNT? 1% 0.1% Microsoft knows that; they rendered DNT meaningless: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47990485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47990485
  - quinndexter 5mo ago
    Just here to say yeah, I've seen this more of this lately- "The do-not-track signal has been followed" or somesuch.
  - buzer 5mo ago
    GPC must be honored in California. https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa/gpc https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa/gpc According to https://www.didomi.io/blog/global-privacy-control-gpc-2026 https://www.didomi.io/blog/global-privacy-control-gpc-2026 it must also be honored in 11 other states but I'm not familiar enough with the specifics regarding those.
- pseudalopex 5mo ago
  Global Privacy Control replaced Do Not Track.
- LocalH 5mo ago
  No, the advertisers were responsible for that outcome, by using that as a flimsy excuse to ignore the setting Browsers only removed it once it was clear that the advertising industry was going to refuse to honor it
Gigachad 5mo ago
There's an inherent conflict. No one _wants_ to be tracked, there is no direct benefit to being tracked and only downsides. And advertisers want to track you. So there was no way to respect the flag other than making it obscure so only a few dedicated people turned it on.
- xigoi 5mo ago
  > No one _wants_ to be tracked Plenty of people seem to genuinely believe that “personalized ads” are good for them.
  - Jaxan 5mo ago
    They are told to believe that.
  - PunchyHamster 5mo ago
    and yet if they had question prompted to them even most of them would click "no"
    - maccard 5mo ago
      No, they don’t. They will click whichever option gets the modal out of the way.
  - jampekka 5mo ago
    No-one is too absolute, but could ne used as a rough rule of thumb. Depending on the study, 0.16% to 7% want to get tracked. https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2025-07/Pay_or_Okay_Report_2025_web.pdf https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2025-07/Pay_or_Okay_Repo...
    - LocalH 5mo ago
      Lies, damned lies, and statistics
  - drfloyd51 5mo ago

by LocalH 5mo ago

Advertisers chose to ignore DNT because they claimed Microsoft making DNT enabled by default took agency away from the user. In reality, they probably weren't going to honor it anyway.

mmooss 5mo ago

Microsoft is too sophisticated to plead ignorance; they are responsible for that outcome and I think we can assume they knowningly chose it. (Though now Microsoft browsers are such a small portion of the market that it doesn't matter.) The biggest failure of DNT was browser makers - including Mozilla - removing it. It has zero performance impact (1 bit?) or development cost. As long as it was out there, when there was momentum against tracking, advocates had evidence of both demand for privacy and of trackers ignoring user wishes.

applfanboysbgon 5mo ago
> advocates had evidence of both demand for privacy and of trackers ignoring user wishes. This evidence both still exists and is also completely useless for anything. The more important consideration, by far, is that the DNT flag was actively harmful to users in the real world because, if it was acknowledged at all, it was used maliciously to help fingerprint and track users. There is no reason for browsers to continue providing to their users a toggle that not only misleads them about what will happen with the setting enabled, but actively contributes to the opposite outcome because we live in a world where being evil is the norm.
dylan604 5mo ago
Lately, I've come across websites that instead of a cookie banner display a banner that states they recognize and honor my wish to not be tracked. Whether that really do or not is something I did not spend time looking into. The first time I saw it I thought it was a fluke, and then it happened a few more times with in a short time period. Couldn't tell you what sites they were though as it was just something from search results.
- mmooss 5mo ago
  Wow. I've never seen that. It would be great if it became more widespread. But isn't DNT deprecated in most browsers? Maybe I misremember.
  - dylan604 5mo ago
    ::shrug:: I set it a long time ago and never looked back. I never looked into it being deprecated, but I knew that pretty much everyone ignored it for reasons. But by these banners, I'm guessing it still lives on as a setting.
    - LocalH 5mo ago
      Advertisers ignored it because MS decided to turn it into opt-in instead of opt-out, and advertisers very much hate opt-in. They'd much rather require the most permissive defaults, and put every barrier they can in front of opting out.
      - mmooss 5mo ago
        Users usually don't know about or change settings, so opt-out often means little. What portion of users knows about DNT? 1% 0.1% Microsoft knows that; they rendered DNT meaningless: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47990485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47990485
- quinndexter 5mo ago
  Just here to say yeah, I've seen this more of this lately- "The do-not-track signal has been followed" or somesuch.
- buzer 5mo ago
  GPC must be honored in California. https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa/gpc https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa/gpc According to https://www.didomi.io/blog/global-privacy-control-gpc-2026 https://www.didomi.io/blog/global-privacy-control-gpc-2026 it must also be honored in 11 other states but I'm not familiar enough with the specifics regarding those.
pseudalopex 5mo ago
Global Privacy Control replaced Do Not Track.
LocalH 5mo ago
No, the advertisers were responsible for that outcome, by using that as a flimsy excuse to ignore the setting Browsers only removed it once it was clear that the advertising industry was going to refuse to honor it

Gigachad 5mo ago

There's an inherent conflict. No one _wants_ to be tracked, there is no direct benefit to being tracked and only downsides. And advertisers want to track you. So there was no way to respect the flag other than making it obscure so only a few dedicated people turned it on.

xigoi 5mo ago
> No one _wants_ to be tracked Plenty of people seem to genuinely believe that “personalized ads” are good for them.
- Jaxan 5mo ago
  They are told to believe that.
- PunchyHamster 5mo ago
  and yet if they had question prompted to them even most of them would click "no"
  - maccard 5mo ago
    No, they don’t. They will click whichever option gets the modal out of the way.
- jampekka 5mo ago
  No-one is too absolute, but could ne used as a rough rule of thumb. Depending on the study, 0.16% to 7% want to get tracked. https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2025-07/Pay_or_Okay_Report_2025_web.pdf https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2025-07/Pay_or_Okay_Repo...
  - LocalH 5mo ago
    Lies, damned lies, and statistics
- drfloyd51 5mo ago