| ▲ | cm2187 6 hours ago |
| Accept the cookies and flush them out every time you close the browser. I think it would be naive anyway to assume that clicking no on a cookie banner would achieve much for your privacy. |
|
| ▲ | mimimi31 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| So-called "cookie banners" usually ask for your consent to much more than optional tracking cookies. By accepting you might be giving your permission to e.g. track you through various fingerprinting methods, build a profile and share it with advertising partners. |
| |
| ▲ | cm2187 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If they are aggressive enough to do fingerprinting, what makes you think they would abide to your choice? You do browser fingerprinting when you want to overcome people rejecting cookies. | |
| ▲ | reddalo 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | An additional reason for not browsing the web without uBlock Origin on Firefox or other browsers with full support (not Chrome). |
|
|
| ▲ | bitmasher9 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why even ask for the cookies if denying them doesn’t achieve much? It’s naive to think that cookies are the only tool used for tracking, but they are the most powerful tool for web based tracking. |
| |
| ▲ | _heimdall 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Because in some legal systems you're required to ask. You're also required to follow fairly specific rules relates to the user's selection and data, though I can't imagine enforcement keeps up with websites breaking those laws. | |
| ▲ | N0isRESFe8GXmqR 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because EU Cookie Law was a flawed idea? | | |
| ▲ | OKRainbowKid 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How so? The law doesn't require cookie banners.
However, you could argue that tracking/advertisement cookies should have been banned completely and that the law is flawed in that it allows for tracking given user "consent". | | |
| ▲ | raw_anon_1111 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | I love the EU apologists - “it wasn’t a bad law just because the outcome was bad” | | |
| ▲ | GJim 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | The alternative being to bend over and grab our ankles with both hands the moment the scummy ad-tech industry requests our data? Sorry mate, the GDPR is there for a bloody good reason; and legit companies obey the law. | | |
| ▲ | drnick1 44 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | The GDPR is theater. An effective privacy law would have prevented data collection in the first place. Data collected will be abused, and a cute little banner won't change this. | |
| ▲ | raw_anon_1111 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes because of the GDPR, there aren’t still two trillion dollar+ market cap ad Tech companies. But at least we have cookie banners everywhere. | | |
| ▲ | GJim 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | More pity to those who (for some bizarre reason) voluntarily choose to interact with those ad-tech companies. | | |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | wsng 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It was not a flawed idea, but flawed execution. The law should have mandated to adhere to the user's "do not track" setting in the browser. That being said, it was very early regulation in this field, and more recent approaches are already better, e.g., GDPR, DMA. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Barbing 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| No, shan’t give them the metrics :) |
