3 ms·
Perhaps web browsers should just include an option to disable cookies. That way, websites wouldn't have to display these kind of alerts, and users wouldn't hav
by maqr 14y ago
Perhaps web browsers should just include an option to disable cookies. That way, websites wouldn't have to display these kind of alerts, and users wouldn't have to trust that all sites will actually display these warnings before setting a cookie. One could even imagine an advanced web browser feature which would allow users to allow or deny cookies on a per-site basis.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- zbowling 14y agoI didn't realize this was sarcasm. Rare find on hacker news. Better access to the cookie controls without hunting in preference panels would be nice, but I'm sure extensions can fix that.
- gavinpc 14y agoSarcasm aside, it's curious that lawmakers (even in Europe) thought it better to make a requirement of O(N^N) site owners rather than "require" that O(5) browsers implement a feature which they all do already. I always use cookies on a whitelist-only basis, and it is quite common to find web sites that require cookies for no good reason -- sometimes, I suspect, without even realizing it -- and then fail with no message when cookies are disabled. I believe that cookies should be regarded as a progressive enhancement. If your web site requires cookies to implement a paywall, then detect when they are disabled and say so. If you can add features when cookies are available, great; if they're not, let me know what I'm missing. But don't tell me that "a browser error is preventing me from logging in," as many sites do. Once again, I'm sure this is boilerplate code that the actual site owner isn't even aware of.