4 ms·
I have a theory that about 97% of developers and managers completed the cookie consent (or whatever) on their own product 5 years ago and hence never see it aga
by michaelt 5mo ago
I have a theory that about 97% of developers and managers completed the cookie consent (or whatever) on their own product 5 years ago and hence never see it again, and they have no idea how bad the experience for new customers actually is.
So the developers and bosses all think they're doing a great job and they've got a carefully curated homepage, even though the regular users get a cloudflare captcha, then a cookie modal, then a newsletter modal, then an install-our-app modal, all blocking their access to the 'buy product' button.
- tardedmeme 5mo agoI wonder if cloudflare is wise enough to always skip captchas from IP addresses it detects are associated with that website's owners.
- LeoPanthera 5mo agoAlways test your website in a private window.
- JKCalhoun 5mo agoI have a theory that they don't care what customers think.
- kcplate 5mo agoOh we care, but when it comes to cookie dickovers, we care more about making the corporate lawyers happy. I’ll admit that I definitely like collecting my paycheck much more than I worry about customer annoyance at acknowledging a cookie policy. Some hills ain't worth dying on.
- SoftTalker 5mo agoOr your company could respect its users and only use cookies for essential site functions. Then you don't need a dickover.
- bombcar 5mo agoI like the make the cookie for hiding the dickover be 30-60 minutes in duration for anyone in a company IP address. Own medicine is the best dog food.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- brett-jackson 5mo agoThe vast majority of users don’t know or care. The ones who do are blocking the cookies anyways. No one wins with these popups (except trial lawyers and sellers of cookie consent SaaS, of course).
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- interf4ce 5mo agoProtecting forms with reCAPTCHA uses cookies that fall under "marketing" and gathering site stats using Google Analytics uses cookies that fall under "marketing" and "statistics," making a consent banner or dickover pretty much required. Are these services necessary for a page to work? Not at all, but many businesses consider them crucial. Unprotected public forms almost immediately start getting spammed by bots, burying real, important communications from potential clients. GA offers insight into what visitors to your site are looking for, which has real business value. I don't like it any more than you do, but I get why businesses would choose to use these. On their end, at least with reCAPTCHA, they're just trying to protect themselves from the complete shitshow that the modern web has become.
- bmn__ 5mo agoFalse dichotomy, it's perfectly possible to have protection on a form without dicking over a user's basic right to privacy.
- 4mo ago
- TehShrike 5mo agoI suspect many developers know the truth, at least to some degree. Their boss said "it's only one [more] popup, add it anyway." Repeat ad infinitum
- amarant 5mo ago>modal I think you mean dickover,sir.
- fuzzfactor 5mo agoVery accurate terminology for things that are equally as welcome as the developer sending each user a surprise popup pic of their dickover and over again. Each time they visit the website. Ad infinitum.
- iknowstuff 5mo agoI'd prefer that over cookie/app/newsletter popovers
- zem 5mo agoone of the more memorable stories from the daily wtf was from a dev at a banner ad company who got called into a VP's office and yelled at at great length because some pop-up banner was broken. after investigation it turned out the VP had installed an ad blocker and forgotten about it.
- econ 5mo agoBest ones, when refusing, ask again on the next page. Perhaps they don't know what a functional cookie is? Maybe the marketing vocabulary only has YES?
- Freak_NL 5mo agoThey do. Those are designed to make you click 'Oh for fuck's sake. Just set the fucking cookies.'
- clear-octopus 5mo agoI really don’t understand why the desired cookie behavior could not be set globally for all websites in the browser. Why do I have the accept / reject them on every website and trust the website will actually do what I ask.
- interf4ce 5mo agoIt can be, see Global Privacy Control [1]. As an example, the Complianz consent plugin for WordPress can detect and respect the user's GPC setting, but that feature can be toggled. So even though this exists, many sites will still ignore it. 1. https://globalprivacycontrol.org/ https://globalprivacycontrol.org/
- jurgenburgen 5mo ago> GPC signal not detected.Please download a browser/extension that supports it. Doesn’t seem to be widely adopted.
- bmn__ 5mo agoBecause society is full of dickheads? In a just world, it would be legal for a policeman to bludgeon anyone who does not respect a user agent's <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track> setting. Second offence, hang them from the flagpole in front of the parliament building. The problem would disappear over night.
- thechao 5mo ago
- SlightlyLeftPad 5mo agoDevelopers just aren’t good at determining what works best for the user experience. How would designers and PMs justify the hundreds of thousands of hours of combined industry research poured into that beautiful, performant front page design and following modal auto-load? Please, leave this to the professionals.
- oneeyedpigeon 5mo ago> and hence never see it again This sounds like it would be a better implementation than 99.9% of the dickovers I encounter. Almost always, I dismiss them, then see them again in future. Sometimes with what feels like every site visit.
- bryanrasmussen 5mo agoYou see them again in the future because you dismissed them, if you do what they want you to do they will never bother you again in case you changed your mind.
- rererereferred 5mo agoWe use a third party cookie consent service. It shows different things depending on your location (and allows disabling different types of cookies depending on your local laws). Lawyers mandate it. It's easier than having to figure out the laws everywhere on our own. To me it shows a banner that stays out of the way. But I couldn't tell you for sure it doesn't cover the whole page to other people.
- crote 5mo agoHave you considered just not violating anyone's privacy? Cookie banners aren't a force of nature. They are required solely because you want to track people. Not tracking people? No need for a cookie banner!
- threecheese 5mo agoUnfortunately you need cookies for any good user analytics; and no, I don’t mean the invasive kind that Marketing put in - I mean the kind which allows you to figure out why your site is broken. Which ironically are the same tools you’d need to find out if your users are experiencing unintentional dickovers.
- jason_oster 5mo agoYou don't need tracking cookies to log RED metrics.
- jerhewet 5mo agouBlock Origin. Right-click, Block Element, click "Create", done.
- appplication 5mo agoNo, not done. You then have to do it over and over and over and over on every new website you visit.
- rpdillon 5mo agoEnable this instead: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/blob/master/filters/annoyances-cookies.txt https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/blob/master/filters/...
- happymellon 5mo agoI find the scrolling hijack can kick in and I have an unresponsive page unless I disable uBlock, reject cookies, enable to remove all other crap.
- Gormo 5mo agoWhat web developer doesn't regularly test their site in a clean browser session?