• Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    A great EU-solution to protect us this was. No more evil cookies…

    And who would care about the gazillions of scripts that still track you hard. And the fingerprint of your browser that makes you unique-ish. And dare do disallow just one tiny script and the whole site breaks and makes your browser cry.

    I miss the internet shortly before and after google came up. Just information.

  • watson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is called a “dark pattern“ (a rather shitty design concept) wherein the design is specifically engineered to make you finally give up because it’s so overly complicated, and to just accept the cookies so they can track you and get all your personal information and sell it.

    • hikaru755@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      It’s also straight up illegal under gdpr. Rejecting all unnecessary cookies must be as easy as accepting them.

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      It’s also illegal. The “no fuck you” button should be as visible and accessible as the “accept all”.

      Make it as easy for users to withdraw their consent as it was for them to give their consent in the first place.

      Obviously, no one cares. There’s no real consequences, cookies are still dropped on your system regardless of consent, and cookies weren’t even the real problem to begin with, user profiling had already moved to include other invasive techniques.

      As far as making something complex and useless go, it’d have been way easier to work with the w3c to add attributes to cookies to identify their purpose (essential, preferences, etc.) so the browser could filter them out based on that attributes and the matching of the current website. It would have meant way less work on the website owners, provide ways for end-user to set their preferences universally and be done with it, enforced said preferences, and so on. And people that would lie on the purpose of their cookie would still lie, but could be caught red-handed (assuming anyone actually cared).

      Instead we got this mess.

  • Album@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 day ago

    Have your browser delete all cookies after you close it. It’s easier. You can add exceptions too.

  • Damarus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 day ago

    Little known fact, it’s illegal to hide the option to reject cookies behind multiple clicks.

    • Demdaru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Just wanted to say that. And it’s visible, when visiting from EU, if you click “Manage preferences”, all except the “legitimate interest” ones are off by default.

      WHICH IS BULLSHIT AS THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE INTEREST >_<

      • pmk@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        In the EU. It must be as easy to select no as it is to select yes. Afaik, each country has its own agency that you can contact about violations.

    • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I know that but it doesn’t really change anything. I’m not going to sue each and every website because of that

      • Damarus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        You don’t have to sue anyone. You can ask the offenders to correct their website and if they don’t, give a notice to the data protection authority in your country and they will handle it from there.

  • gegil@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    I just browse everything in private window by default. Accepting cookies resets them after opening new window.

  • Konna@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    At least one tabloid newspaper in Finland (Iltalehti) has put the settings behind a paywall. Accept tracking or pay up.

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Which is not allowed, and they could be sued for tiny lil fees. IF someone would sue them.

      Nothing more awesome than half-assed solution that actually do nothing and help noone but increase work for everyone involved. This is peak efficiency.

  • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    They should really be forced to make a browser API for retrieving cookie consent info — just like there is an API for retrieving the cookies themselves. No need to use 20 different consent window libraries when they all do the same thing. And you could then select Reject All once in your browser’s settings and be done with it.