←back to thread

332 points vegasbrianc | 9 comments | | HN request time: 1.227s | source | bottom
1. teruakohatu ◴[] No.42141983[source]
I am about as far from Europe as you can get, and I think my fellow kiwis also spent an inordinate about of time clicking EU mandated cookie banners.

Cookies should be enforced in the browser. I think all the major browsers block third party cookies now. Bad actors can use other fingerprints to do tracking.

replies(3): >>42142314 #>>42142316 #>>42145424 #
2. nicce ◴[] No.42142314[source]
> I think all the major browsers block third party cookies now. Bad actors can use other fingerprints to do tracking.

One would hope so. Google cancelled the plans https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-scraps-plan-remove...

3. Rygian ◴[] No.42142316[source]
"cookie" banners are required for any tracking, not just teaching based specifically on technical cookies.

Blocking 3rd party cookies has no impact. Everyone and their cousin can technically track you with first party cookies.

4. GJim ◴[] No.42145424[source]
You <------> The Point

No "cookie banner" is required UNLESS you are using cookies to track me or personally idetify me.... in which case, you must ask my explicit consent to do so.

Blame the parasitic adtech industry wanting trade your personal data. Not the EU for providing you with consumer protection.

replies(1): >>42145610 #
5. randomdata ◴[] No.42145610[source]
> Blame the parasitic adtech industry wanting trade your personal data.

Blame them for what? We all understand that personal information is the currency that pays for these services. While we may not love that we have to pay (who does?), we accept it as a fair trade. Until governments get their ass in gear to make paying with more favourable currencies viable, that is going to remain, now just with extra clicks.

> Not the EU for providing you with consumer protection.

I guess a bandaid is better than nothing, but we'd be better off if the EU would tackle the real issue. Going there would ruffle some real feathers, though, so good luck. But if there is blame to go around, it is on the EU for being too afraid to ruffle them.

replies(3): >>42145903 #>>42145924 #>>42147339 #
6. GJim ◴[] No.42145903{3}[source]
> we accept it as a fair trade.

For it to be a fair trade, you must fairly ask permission for my personal data! That is the very essence of the GDPR!

replies(1): >>42147179 #
7. kalaksi ◴[] No.42145924{3}[source]
No, everyone does not understand that and companies were not transparent with what they do with the data, what data they collected and who they shared it with. Not to mention, if you consider it a payment-like transaction, surely you'll want to give consent instead of blindly trusting random websites? These are some of the problems GDPR solves.
8. randomdata ◴[] No.42147179{4}[source]
And the problem with the GDPR. In a typical market situation the onus is on the buyer to first offer payment. The beggar on the street saying "Sir, can you spare some personal information?" is not how anyone likes to do business.

But that's where the GDPR has left things, thinking the problem is with the vendor, when in reality the problem is with the consumer spending beyond their means. Fair enough that the consumer needs protection from themselves, but, when it is a spending problem, why does that not come in the form of legal mandates over how one's wallet is used?

Of course, this would be improved in a much better way if, again, governments would actually tackle the real problem.

9. card_zero ◴[] No.42147339{3}[source]
> these services

What are the services? Leave out sites where you pay for something with money, or banks, or subscription sites. Those often have tracking too, but they could exist without it. What services are the free ones providing?

News is a special case, paying for journalism is a problem. Other than that:

* Videos and images

* Forums and blogs

* Databases like IMDB

* Random bits of information you want once in your life

I'm struck by how the presence of any amount of website design makes all these things worse. It's not only too easy for them to get our data, it's too hard for us to get their data, because the presentation and theatrical impression of being a service is all self-aggrandizing and works to delay and capture users for more tracking and ads. All we really want is servers, not services.

If somehow storage and processing was paid for by magical pixies, and available as a utilitarian series of gray bulletin boards with identical design, that would be much better than all the bloated sites that track visitors. It's wrong to portray this as a bargain in which we respect and appreciate some sort of service, and therefore ought to pay for it, because there is no service. They're not being paid for providing something wonderful, they're being paid for having got there first and for being well-known, or promoting themselves.