←back to thread

332 points vegasbrianc | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.363s | source
Show context
uniqueuid ◴[] No.42144954[source]
I am kind of frustrated by the widespread misunderstandings in this thread.

Laws are best when they are abstract, so that there is no need for frequent updates and they adapt to changing realities. The European "cookie law" does not mandate cookie banners, it mandates informed consent. Companies choose to implement that as a banner.

There is no doubt that the goals set by the law are sensible. It is also not evident that losing time over privacy is so horrible. In fact, when designing a law that enhances consumer rights through informed consent, it is inevitable that this imposes additional time spent on thinking, considering and acting.

It's the whole point, folks! You cannot have an informed case-by-case decision without spending time.

replies(16): >>42145020 #>>42145131 #>>42145155 #>>42145209 #>>42145333 #>>42145656 #>>42145815 #>>42145852 #>>42146272 #>>42146629 #>>42147195 #>>42147452 #>>42147781 #>>42148046 #>>42148053 #>>42150487 #
weberer ◴[] No.42145209[source]
I am informed and chose "No" each time. Why do EU lawmakers not allow me to automatically say no? All they have to do is add a line to the law enforcing companies to respect the DNT or GPC header.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track

replies(3): >>42145443 #>>42145518 #>>42149011 #
1. daveoc64 ◴[] No.42145443[source]
Tracking isn't the only thing that the law covers.