| ▲ | mnky9800n a day ago |
| Yes gdpr could be good. But instead it’s a cookies warning. |
|
| ▲ | qwertox a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Cookie warnings are a sign of companies not willing to accept that they cannot just collect data on you and monetize it. How does that make the EU regulation something bad? The bad thing is that the companies are willing to bombard us with the worst possible cookie banners, in order to monetize our visits. Maybe the next EU regulation should be to prohibit those banners and allow companies to add a small toggle somewhere on their site so we can toggle it to allow them to set 3rd-party cookies. |
| |
| ▲ | petcat a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > The bad thing is that the companies are willing to bombard us with the worst possible cookie banners, in order to monetize our visits. The EU's own government websites [1] are littered with the same cookie banners. They want the visitor data just as bad as everyone else. > Maybe the next EU regulation We don't need anymore EU regulations seeing how bad and thoughtless they already are. [1] https://european-union.europa.eu/ | | |
| ▲ | qwertox a day ago | parent | next [-] | | -> [Accept all cookies] [Accept only essential cookies] at the bottom of the page. Sure, I don't understand why they don't remove it if they know that an average-iq'd person would accept only essential cookies, but that cookie banner belongs to the top 5% of friendly cookie banners. I was talking about those you find on the typical website, usually news sites, who make them as annoying as possible. | |
| ▲ | eps a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > _We_ don't need anymore EU regulations seeing how bad and thoughtless ... Try and speak for yourself. No need to speak on everyone's behalf, this is disingenuous. |
| |
| ▲ | CalRobert a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s bad because they’re not enforcing it. Have the law and enforce it or don’t have the law. |
|
|
| ▲ | ascorbic a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Cookie warnings are from the ePrivacy directive. |
|
| ▲ | CalRobert a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Cookie warnings predate gdpr actually. (Random discussion from 16 years ago - https://www.theregister.com/2009/11/25/cookie_law/) The funny thing is 99% of cookie dialogs are illegal anyway (it should be opt in, not opt out) |
|
| ▲ | moi2388 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No, those two are completely separate laws |
|
| ▲ | juliangmp a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I never understood the crying about the cookie banners They're not the problem, they never have been. It's the fact that so many parts of the modern internet rely on selling user data to make a profit, not the regulation that they now have to do the outrageous thing and (gasp) ask for consent first. |
| |
| ▲ | immibis a day ago | parent [-] | | The problem with GDPR and cookie banners is that GDPR allows the cookie banners to be worded so indirectly. "To improve our service we share collected information with 5723 partners..." If the law would force them to say "Do you want Larry Ellison to get richer by looking through your webcam? [Yes] [No]" it would be a good law. | | |
| ▲ | MiddleEndian a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Ideally it would just be like the Do Not Track flag, with one flag for each category of opt-out tracking, but actually enforced (even if on by default) so no popups would be needed at all. | |
| ▲ | CalRobert a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | It doesn’t. That’s violating gdpr. But you can break gdpr without consequences. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | jwr a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| GDPR has nothing to do with cookies, in spite of the commonly spread false narrative. |
