- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- programmer_humor@programming.dev
fixed
You must log in or # to comment.
“ NOOO YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND BRO! OUR BUSINESS MODEL DOESN’T WORK IF WE CAN’T DO MASS SURVELIANCE BRO!”
I DECLARE “LEGITIMATE INTEREST” !!
I wonder how they can even find those 1142 partners to share my browsing data with
Poly culture is freaking wild.
I want websites to all have a button that says “yeah you can sell my personal data but the website contractually agrees to give me half”
Unfortunately some pages have started blocking scrolling when the cookie banner is not closed properly. That can also be fixed with uBlock of course, but I encounter that specific problem quite often.
That shit should be illegal. Accept all / reject all. That’s it. If somebody is disabling cookies, literally nobody in the entire world wants any of them! “Oh yeah, please, only keep my location data but not the data about my purchase decisions”…
I have good news for you: In the EU (which forced everyone to have the cookie-accept-banners in the first place) it IS illegal.
It was pretty crazy taking my phone from the United States to the EU and seeing all of the notifications of how my data is being shared by “free” apps! It just goes to show that the saying “if the product is free, you’re the product” is 100% true!
The EU didn’t force anyone to have the cookie banners. If the site only uses nessecary cookies - the kind you can’t turn off in the prompt - there doesn’t need to any prompts because that’s perfectly fine. The intrusive, obnoxious and deliberate confusing popups are from data harvesters throwing a tantrum because they can’t stalk you every waking second any more, and complying in the most malicious and disrespectful way they can.
Cookie banners are nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with tech-bros.
The EU knew about DNT signals before GDPR was finalized and decided to ignore them. I know, I was a web dev at that time (and still am, yes I’m ancient in internet years). This is on the EU and techbros, but having internet explorer and other browsers like firefox (not sure if chrome did it?) enabling DNT by default would make tech bros upset, and the EU couldn’t have that, so they made the tech bros a little happier by allowing the consent banners instead.
From the working party back then, which was promptly rejected in the final GDPR we have today:
2016
The Working Party recommends rephrasing the requirements in the current Recital 66 of Directive 2009/136/EC. Instead of relying on website operators to obtain consent on behalf of third parties (such as advertising and social networks), manufacturers of browsers and other software or operating systems should be encouraged to develop, implement and ensure effective user empowerment, by offering control tools within the browser (or other software or operating system) such as Do Not Track (DNT), or other technical means that allow users to easily express and withdraw their specific consent, in accordance with Article 7 of the GDPR. Such tools can be offered to the user at the initial set-up with privacy-friendly default settings. Adherence to accepted technical and policy compliance standards must become a common practice. In addition, website operators should respect and adhere to browser control tools or other user preference settings.
2017
The Working Party recommends that terminal equipment and software must by default offer privacy protective settings, and offer clear options to users to confirm or change these default settings during installation. The settings must be easily accessible during use. Users must be enabled to signal specific consent through their browser settings. Privacy preferences should not be limited to interference by third parties or be limited to cookies. The Working Party strongly recommends to make adherence to the Do Not Track standard mandatory.
Heck, the W3C was even talking about working to make it happen.
Point is, the EU sucked up to corporations, surprise surprise.
Receipts:
https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/index_en.htm
https://ec.europa.eu/justice/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2016/wp240_en.pdf
https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/article29/redirection/document/44103
It is not fine, you still need to be informed and accept
If the cookies are nessecary for the site to technically function, you don’t need to be promoted to accept. The law - which doesn’t even mention cookies - allows the absolute minimum amount of data required to provide a service to be gathered. For a website, that included cookies for storing preferences, shopping baskets, login tokens, etc.
I mean… The EU could’ve also said ‘no privacy invasive cookies’ instead of ‘cookie Banner if privacy invasive cookies’. I don’t think being able to disable is bad, I think they didn’t go far enough (and also of course datapeople only comply in the most malicious way possible. It’s literally their job, a job that shouldn’t exist.)
Even the idea of tightening regulations for igaming has many EU countries frothing at the mouth, what makes you think that this didn’t start as “no privacy-invasive cookies?”
I still run umatrix in Firefox snd the level of calling out that even simple pages do is shocking. And likely all those called sites even for fonts are collecting something about you.
LibreWolf, is my response.
Use adblocking DNS on your router, so you don’t need to mess with every device separately
Is this page worth my time…nope
*closes tab
Onto the next tab
Not if you’re using a Chromium based browser. Ublock Origin no longer supported in Chromium v3.
You can’t get it from the store, but it still works as long as you already had it, install using a browser running Chromium V2 before updating, or install it from file, right? Better yet, switch to Firefox (but the most de-Mozilla’d one)
There’s your problem, pally.
In my experience uBlock origin doesn’t really get rid of cookie consent banners/dark patterns. Damn good at bonking ads though.
In the filter lists, there are three lists named annoyances. Just enable one of them, and these banners will be gone.
See 2nd panel of comic.
2nd panel means you have to do it again and again for every new website you visit, or if you clear cookies regularly. Using the ublock addon, you have to enable this setting once, and it is persistent across sessions.
Also getting rid of cookie banners doesn’t mean the site won’t track with third party cookies. The cookies are ON by default and until you tell them to turn it OFF, they keep the cookies on.
That’s a good point. However in the EU it should be the opposite - otherwise the site is violating GDPR.
Sometimes I have a feeling sites do whatever they want anyway regardless of bow many dark patterns I click through to find the “no” and “off” buttons because there are no real repercussions. Just like the “do not track” request and “robots.txt” are essentially useless.
However in the EU it should be the opposite - otherwise the site is violating GDPR.
Damn then that’s great for EU users. You can really see how scummy these companies are on how they treat GDPR and non-GDPR countries.
And,
I want some of them to stay though, it wouldn’t be a huge hassle to not have them, but I’m a bit lazy…
I wish there was an option to clear third-party cookies automatically
Advertisers get around that by masquerading their cookies to appear not third party.
I’m not aware of this. Can you elaborate?
Essentially, when browsers started to initially implement toggles to block third party cookies more than a decade ago, advertisers in response pressured website hosts to mark their cookies as “essential/required” (AKA forced cookies). You will not get the same revenue as a website host if you do not play ball with this, and some go even a step further by routing/disguising their cookies through trusted domains (google, amazon, etc…) to mask the “true source” , in an attempt to mitigate detection from basic browser filters.
Ublock Origin and the like are pretty good at catching most of them through crowdsourced lists though.
