1y ago

European Union set to revise cookie law, admits cookie banners are annoying

www.techspot.com

European Union set to revise cookie law, admits cookie banners are annoying::undefined

Europe @feddit.de

CAVOK @lemmy.world

2y ago

European Union set to revise cookie law, admits cookie banners are annoying

www.techspot.com /news/101396-european-union-set-revise-cookie-law-admits-cookie.html

Technology @lemmy.world

Nemeski @lemm.ee

2y ago

European Union set to revise cookie law, admits cookie banners are annoying

www.techspot.com /news/101396-european-union-set-revise-cookie-law-admits-cookie.html

27 comments

A major political entity admitting mistake and correcting based on feedback. How refreshing.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-matic/
- If you’re a safari user (desktop and mobile): https://oblador.github.io/hush/
  
  Consent-o-matic also works on iOS and safari
- Thanks! It works on mobile (Nightly).
  
  should work on Android regardless of the branch.
- Thanks!
The actual EU documents say the complete opposite. They say that the cookie law is going nowhere, this new thing is a framework for easier compliance with the existing law for big business.
From the letter issued by the EU Supervisory Authority to the Commission about this :
While voluntary commitments [of companies to adhere to the GDPR] may be a useful tool, the pledging principles should by no means be used to circumvent legal obligations. In addition, undertaking voluntary commitments does not equate or guarantee compliance with the applicable data protection and privacy framework.
The banners should stay. If a site doesn't use cookies, you don't get a banner. The sites choose for themselves if they want to use cookies and put up an obnoxious banner, or not use cookies.
- I think enforcing some universal API for this would be a decent compromise. This would allow browsers to handle the UI which means the user can set a global preference or set it per site. At the very least the UI would be uniform so you wouldn't have to fight dark patterns trying to disable them.
- What are you on about? The banners and cookie abuse should go
  
  I think what OP is saying that, yes, the cookie abuse should go for sure (I'm actually privvy of the "Legitimate interest" options.)
  But that if websites want to track you, then they have to be transparent about it - hence the banners. Wanna track me? Ask me for permission. Is it annoying? Tough luck! Are you losing users because of it? Well, boo-hoo! Remove the tracking and there you go. No banner. Everyone happy.
I trust they'll do a good job focusing on privacy rather than outright going back to "no banner, cookies for everyone!"
Install privacy badge, turn on "automatically send do not track" and those things all just melt away when you go to a new site as it processes almost all sites automatically.
- The "do not track" is really just you asking them politely not to track you, they are not obligated to stop tracking...more often than not, it is completely ignored and they track you anyway.
  
  ...and the request itself can be used as a data point for tracking.
  
  California's regulations have teeth but there are some exclusions and exemptions, I guess like most laws it'll only be followed if suing and getting damages is easy and results made public.
- Is it possible to do this on mobile phone browsers?
  
  Yup, that's where it's the most valuable to not have to drag fingers around and whatnot, easier if you needed to deal with popup on PC with mouse and keyboard and whatnot.
There are no cookie banners, at least not nessesary ones. There is just a consent requirement for processing personal data.
- Um, what? Almost every consent banner I've seen has specifically asked about cookies, and usually nothing else.
  
  This is a misconception many sites fall into. They really do not have to ask for just cookies, it's like there were asking to use CSS or JavaScript :).
Can't wait until 28 when people realize how nice cell phones used to be.

27 comments