this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
722 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59370 readers
4242 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 24 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

What sort of irks me is what a mixed bag EU regulation is. Some is good (GDPR), not denying that. Some is annoying (you're going to be accepting cookies 100 times a day until you're dead thanks to them), and Whatsapp runs on all devices, so while interoperability nice, even as a free-software, Linux person I don't really care.

However, if you have to deal with friends or family in the US and you don't have an iPhone though, god help you. They don't care about this.

I guess my complaint is that EU regulation may seem legally elegant, but I think it is sometimes quite blind to the real situation on the ground.

It looks good on the books but we still, say, don't have a standard ARM boot process for smartphones that would help users not be dependent on whatever shitty ROM the OEM wants them to have. That would be life changing, but it will never even be talked about.

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 37 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I partially agree with you, and of course I hate those cookie banners, they're completely annoying.

But please remember that it's not the EU's fault is every website is trying to violate your privacy.

If websites weren't tracking everything you do, then cookie banners wouldn't be needed.

I think we should collectively ask for websites to stop spying on us, not changing the cookie banners regulation.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 13 points 8 months ago

That's already a solution to cookie banners: the "do not track" setting. It's been tested in court in Germany and confirmed to count as rejected permission for GDPR purposes. Websites dinky have to obey it.

It's currently slowly gaining traction, there's a privacy advocacy group suing high profile targets over this to create awareness.

We also need a formal change to the cookie law/GDPR to acknowledge "do not track" as the preferred method. Then the banners will slowly go away.

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yep, all the EU done is forced websites to have consent if the website want to process personal data. There are many analytics that does not process IP address or fingerprint and so does not require consent banner. Be annoyed on the websites, not this law.

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

And yet we live in a world where consent spam is actually harder to deal with than tracking, if you're smart.

[–] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The cookie consent also has a huge fail whale of unintended consequences - training users to click [accept], or really [anything], to make the annoyance just go away.

And nefarious actors have their run of the place now. They can slip onerous terms into EULAs and know they will largely be accepted.

As well as random [Continue] boxes to install malware or whatever they want since users are so well trained to click just to get it the fuck off their screen.

[–] IAmHiding@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

That wont hold in court tho

[–] pedroapero@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Wait and see what happens when Google removes traditional tracking from Chrome and every sites start requiring registration to access content !

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Right. That's a very different business model. I don't necessarily have an opinion about whether it would be better or worse. It is easier to look at our current problems and say it would be better. But, eh, I can block most trackers and be a leach off of websites that stay up by selling other people's data. shrug

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Whatsapp runs on all devices

Nope. Android, iOS, Windows and Mac are not all devices. And web versions are far from ideal (some may suggest expanding web capabilities, but please don't).

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world -4 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] png@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you have nothing to say, say nothing at all.

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Same to you, bud

[–] pkill@programming.dev 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

just get an extension and adblocker filters to automatically dismiss/block cookie dialogs and use an allowlist for sites from which you actually need to persist cookies in your browser's settings and set your browser to delete everything else on exit. With Firefox and browsers based on it you can, in addition to that, use container tabs (try sticky containers extension) for even better context isolation.

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Obviously. But that is very difficult on mobile.

[–] pkill@programming.dev 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

on Firefox if a desktop addon has no mobile version you can look up how to add custom add-ons collections when it comes to cookie prompt blockers, but ublock origin and adding filters to it work out of the box. Recently also some apps started showing cookie prompts with no option to decline unless you pay, if they can work offline, make them so

[–] nomadjoanne@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Interesting. I'll check it out. I didn't know that.

(BTW from my understanding of the law sites cannot block functionality if you decline cookies. But it is rarely enforced)