←back to thread

Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

(legiscope.com)
332 points vegasbrianc | 1 comments | 14 Nov 24 22:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
uniqueuid ◴[15 Nov 24 08:34 UTC] 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 #
1. franga2000 ◴[15 Nov 24 20:19 UTC] No.42150487[source]▶
No user wants informed case-by-case decisions, we want to not be tracked. Making this a question that needs to be explicitly answered was already a bastardisation of the original intent of privacy legislation. A competent legislator would've required a user agent level option (like a more advanced version of DNT) that can be set globally and overriden per site. This could be written vaguely enough to not require patching as technology changes.

And even if we wanted case-by-case consent, a standardised format and actually enforced rules against coerced consent would've also been quite easy to do.