▲ 1029 ▼ European Union set to revise cookie law, admits cookie banners are annoying (www.techspot.com) submitted 2 years ago by neme@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world 169 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 118 points 2 years ago (6 children) Just add 2 things: Cookie settings are possible to set in the browser for all pages. There's a reject all button on every cookie banner. permalink fedilink source hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 87 points 2 years ago (2 children) There’s a reject all button on every cookie banner. Most importantly, those banners should be streamiled to look the same at the very least. No highlighing "ACCEPT ALL" while graying out "reject all" nonsense. No swapping the buttons left and right, top to bottom trickery. I'd prefer if the browser takes care of it all, though. I'm already using a plugin for that, though it comes with draw backs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which plugin do you use? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I am using „I still don‘t care about cookies“ for Firefox. It basically auto-selects the least required cookies possible. Though some sites don‘t offer opt-out so it will automatically accept those cookies. Not perfect, but I really can‘t be bothered to do a cookie captcha every time I open a private tab for example. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vext01@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 2 years ago Right, this! Tired of all the dark patterns. permalink fedilink source parent [–] iain@feddit.nl 58 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, just ban the collection of user data and selling to 3rd parties. Enormous fines for anyone still doing it. Destroy this entire industry please. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The EU is primarily pro-business, but that also means being against anti-competitive and underhanded business practices The browser thing sounds like a good solution (although there must be a reason why DNT headers weren't made legally binding, potentially as they wanted to allow people to pick and choose what cookies they allow based on what they thought was "too far" or something but that's conjecture), however disallowing all user data will likely lead to companies not being able to advertise to people who are interested in their products, something which the EU will see as a negative and would also cause an uptick in scams and misinformation as you see in low quality advertising space at the moment permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] iain@feddit.nl 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) This comment got to me really late, probably to Lemmy's distributed nature. But I still want to add: of course business will make more money if you allow more practices, but selling personal data just has too many negative consequences. Also low quality advertising? You mean like billboards and in the newspaper? You mean regular advertising? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago* I mean "[local town] grandma discovers 10 foods you never knew you should avoid" or even downright scams when I say low quality advertising Also "negative consequences" is a bit overdramatic and I'd love you to elaborate... Really it's down to the person's own opinion, eg you don't like it so you'll reject that sort of thing, meanwhile I don't mind it especially as a way of paying for decent quality media so I'll allow it on some sites but not others permalink fedilink source parent [–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (3 children) No there most definitely is not. Most banners have a big yes button, and you need to scroll to a settings button and then do five more things to not get cookies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Maestro@kbin.social 32 points 2 years ago He said that should be added permalink fedilink source parent [–] PinkPanther@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 years ago (1 child) So true. And then you have Schibsted, Norways biggest media conglomerate; the only way to reject cookies is that you have to log in in order to reject it! According to the cookie law (no idea what it's called), it's illegal. It's been reported to the EU and Norwegian government numerous times, but nothing happens. Fuck Schibsted!! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Robaque@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) In my experience a lot of italian (particularly "news") websites basically say "accept cookies or sign up for our paid subscription" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Damage@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago Incognito and accept all permalink fedilink source parent [–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago I meant it should be added as a default thing you have in every one of those things. permalink fedilink source parent [–] filister@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) But even if you reject all, you still allow them to track you through the legitimate interest cookies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 11 points 2 years ago That doesn't sound like a legitimate interest and should be fined or something. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ad_on_is@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago well, not on every cookie banner permalink fedilink source parent [+] XTornado@lemmy.ml -6 points 2 years ago* The reject all is already a thing. (Well is not all all, but reject all except necessary but those doesn't matter much, they are not tracking). That said usually is not called this way as obvious, sometimes is just "reject" without the all, "accept only necessary", "decline", etc or you have to close the banner etc or they use some other confusing pattern. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 87 points 2 years ago (2 children) There’s a reject all button on every cookie banner. Most importantly, those banners should be streamiled to look the same at the very least. No highlighing "ACCEPT ALL" while graying out "reject all" nonsense. No swapping the buttons left and right, top to bottom trickery. I'd prefer if the browser takes care of it all, though. I'm already using a plugin for that, though it comes with draw backs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which plugin do you use? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I am using „I still don‘t care about cookies“ for Firefox. It basically auto-selects the least required cookies possible. Though some sites don‘t offer opt-out so it will automatically accept those cookies. Not perfect, but I really can‘t be bothered to do a cookie captcha every time I open a private tab for example. permalink fedilink source parent [–] vext01@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 2 years ago Right, this! Tired of all the dark patterns. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which plugin do you use? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I am using „I still don‘t care about cookies“ for Firefox. It basically auto-selects the least required cookies possible. Though some sites don‘t offer opt-out so it will automatically accept those cookies. Not perfect, but I really can‘t be bothered to do a cookie captcha every time I open a private tab for example. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I am using „I still don‘t care about cookies“ for Firefox. It basically auto-selects the least required cookies possible. Though some sites don‘t offer opt-out so it will automatically accept those cookies. Not perfect, but I really can‘t be bothered to do a cookie captcha every time I open a private tab for example. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vext01@lemmy.sdf.org 1 point 2 years ago Right, this! Tired of all the dark patterns. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] iain@feddit.nl 58 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, just ban the collection of user data and selling to 3rd parties. Enormous fines for anyone still doing it. Destroy this entire industry please. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The EU is primarily pro-business, but that also means being against anti-competitive and underhanded business practices The browser thing sounds like a good solution (although there must be a reason why DNT headers weren't made legally binding, potentially as they wanted to allow people to pick and choose what cookies they allow based on what they thought was "too far" or something but that's conjecture), however disallowing all user data will likely lead to companies not being able to advertise to people who are interested in their products, something which the EU will see as a negative and would also cause an uptick in scams and misinformation as you see in low quality advertising space at the moment permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] iain@feddit.nl 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) This comment got to me really late, probably to Lemmy's distributed nature. But I still want to add: of course business will make more money if you allow more practices, but selling personal data just has too many negative consequences. Also low quality advertising? You mean like billboards and in the newspaper? You mean regular advertising? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago* I mean "[local town] grandma discovers 10 foods you never knew you should avoid" or even downright scams when I say low quality advertising Also "negative consequences" is a bit overdramatic and I'd love you to elaborate... Really it's down to the person's own opinion, eg you don't like it so you'll reject that sort of thing, meanwhile I don't mind it especially as a way of paying for decent quality media so I'll allow it on some sites but not others permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) The EU is primarily pro-business, but that also means being against anti-competitive and underhanded business practices The browser thing sounds like a good solution (although there must be a reason why DNT headers weren't made legally binding, potentially as they wanted to allow people to pick and choose what cookies they allow based on what they thought was "too far" or something but that's conjecture), however disallowing all user data will likely lead to companies not being able to advertise to people who are interested in their products, something which the EU will see as a negative and would also cause an uptick in scams and misinformation as you see in low quality advertising space at the moment permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] iain@feddit.nl 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) This comment got to me really late, probably to Lemmy's distributed nature. But I still want to add: of course business will make more money if you allow more practices, but selling personal data just has too many negative consequences. Also low quality advertising? You mean like billboards and in the newspaper? You mean regular advertising? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago* I mean "[local town] grandma discovers 10 foods you never knew you should avoid" or even downright scams when I say low quality advertising Also "negative consequences" is a bit overdramatic and I'd love you to elaborate... Really it's down to the person's own opinion, eg you don't like it so you'll reject that sort of thing, meanwhile I don't mind it especially as a way of paying for decent quality media so I'll allow it on some sites but not others permalink fedilink source parent
[–] iain@feddit.nl 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) This comment got to me really late, probably to Lemmy's distributed nature. But I still want to add: of course business will make more money if you allow more practices, but selling personal data just has too many negative consequences. Also low quality advertising? You mean like billboards and in the newspaper? You mean regular advertising? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago* I mean "[local town] grandma discovers 10 foods you never knew you should avoid" or even downright scams when I say low quality advertising Also "negative consequences" is a bit overdramatic and I'd love you to elaborate... Really it's down to the person's own opinion, eg you don't like it so you'll reject that sort of thing, meanwhile I don't mind it especially as a way of paying for decent quality media so I'll allow it on some sites but not others permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 2 years ago* I mean "[local town] grandma discovers 10 foods you never knew you should avoid" or even downright scams when I say low quality advertising Also "negative consequences" is a bit overdramatic and I'd love you to elaborate... Really it's down to the person's own opinion, eg you don't like it so you'll reject that sort of thing, meanwhile I don't mind it especially as a way of paying for decent quality media so I'll allow it on some sites but not others permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (3 children) No there most definitely is not. Most banners have a big yes button, and you need to scroll to a settings button and then do five more things to not get cookies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Maestro@kbin.social 32 points 2 years ago He said that should be added permalink fedilink source parent [–] PinkPanther@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 years ago (1 child) So true. And then you have Schibsted, Norways biggest media conglomerate; the only way to reject cookies is that you have to log in in order to reject it! According to the cookie law (no idea what it's called), it's illegal. It's been reported to the EU and Norwegian government numerous times, but nothing happens. Fuck Schibsted!! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Robaque@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) In my experience a lot of italian (particularly "news") websites basically say "accept cookies or sign up for our paid subscription" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Damage@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago Incognito and accept all permalink fedilink source parent [–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago I meant it should be added as a default thing you have in every one of those things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Maestro@kbin.social 32 points 2 years ago He said that should be added permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PinkPanther@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 years ago (1 child) So true. And then you have Schibsted, Norways biggest media conglomerate; the only way to reject cookies is that you have to log in in order to reject it! According to the cookie law (no idea what it's called), it's illegal. It's been reported to the EU and Norwegian government numerous times, but nothing happens. Fuck Schibsted!! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Robaque@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) In my experience a lot of italian (particularly "news") websites basically say "accept cookies or sign up for our paid subscription" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Damage@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago Incognito and accept all permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Robaque@feddit.it 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) In my experience a lot of italian (particularly "news") websites basically say "accept cookies or sign up for our paid subscription" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Damage@slrpnk.net 1 point 2 years ago Incognito and accept all permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago I meant it should be added as a default thing you have in every one of those things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] filister@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) But even if you reject all, you still allow them to track you through the legitimate interest cookies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 11 points 2 years ago That doesn't sound like a legitimate interest and should be fined or something. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 11 points 2 years ago That doesn't sound like a legitimate interest and should be fined or something. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ad_on_is@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago well, not on every cookie banner permalink fedilink source parent
[+] XTornado@lemmy.ml -6 points 2 years ago* The reject all is already a thing. (Well is not all all, but reject all except necessary but those doesn't matter much, they are not tracking). That said usually is not called this way as obvious, sometimes is just "reject" without the all, "accept only necessary", "decline", etc or you have to close the banner etc or they use some other confusing pattern. permalink fedilink source parent