Oddbean new post about login | logout What’s a solution to cookie banners? The obvious answer is to simply not have them, but this gets you to square one. The next option might be to have browser-wide settings that communicate to websites that you have not opted into marketing / creepy cookies. This could be default opt out - which will obviously hurt the marketing industry but would provide significant benefits to people. Opting in would need to be incentivized. As a middle ground, the law could be modified to allow only the necessary cookies for website functionality. The law would need to be very specific about what counts as necessary (nothing that tracks and shares). This would eliminate the need for banners while preserving some privacy. Thoughts? nostr:note1gvfda7a5t7nn9nffqg00wsj3dpseetzqlwtumuq40c0q2kjv040shwddzf
Who cares about marketing team. Eat the glaric and kill the vampires
we had/have the DNT/GPC http headers.
This is a very difficult topic. If you limit marketing cookies on the web you hurt publishers (as most of them monetise through ads and CPMs plummet once you don’t have cookie) and cause advertisers to pump even more money into walled gardens like meta (as those have EULA / ToCs that make you opt in to their tracking). At the same time advertisers come up with other ideas to track you like email based, deterministic IDs…
I don’t mind if they keep building their walled gardens ;) not like I spend any time on them. Same for email based. Never click.
The web would look vastly different if it was not for display advertisement. It enabled millions of content creators world wide. Value4Value can change that, but we are not quite there yet.
perhaps make cookies require a permission, just like access to location, access to mic, etc. and the browser would let you auto-set except the most popular browser's maker needs them cookies for their core business..
Is there a NIP for that?
Browser implementations and UI only. No law or regulation whatsoever.
This is just back to square one with people installing extensions. Not a bad way to go but doesn’t improve privacy for all. But if that’s what people want then it’s fine.
I don't get your point, because a cookie banner is not improving your privacy. what is square one? and do you think some EU bureaucrat would solve "online privacy" by writing some law? don't their action exactly proof the opposite (with upload filters, chat controls, whatever it's all called, etc.)?
Brave browser does this for me
Then we don’t need any laws
I don't understand why it matters? Why would you add one of those cookie notification things to your site in the first place?
I think the idea was to let people know that they are being tracked and provide a way to opt out. This created a terrible UX and compliance providers simply created a UX that bypasses the intended experience where you usually have to opt it anyway, or close the website. Most people just click accept, making the whole banner irrelevant
I close the page ever time. I'm not even in the eu, I should never be shown those.
Everyone in the world gets them on the internet now because the way GDPR is written is so vague that companies would rather spam all of us with these popups than risk being fined.
because some politicians who don't know how the internet works for you to do so.
You actually don't need a banner for cookies that are required for website functionality, like login, shopping cart, etc. Server-side tracking is also OK and can get you quite a bit of data. IMHO, many websites would be just fine with good implementations of those two options above and could avoid the stupid banners.
that's true. many websites don't even use cookies and have a cookie banner because they are scared and don't want to bother with the details.
How about just get rid of these pointless, posturing privacy laws so we can all stop getting these ridiculous popups? How about we just encourage people to build privacy enhanced tools and browsers instead?