Good lord.
Now the consent pop-ups are a violation.
Are we going to have pop-ups for the pop-ups next in Europe?
Kind of funny.
Now the consent pop-ups are a violation.
Are we going to have pop-ups for the pop-ups next in Europe?
Kind of funny.
https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en
Most users don't care about a session cookie or whatever. In fact for some sites / SPAs etc where users are behind NATs are CGNATs they are pretty needed / useful. Or if the website is being hosted behind a load balancer, you can do a sticky session with the cookie, and many more uses.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/privacy-policy/europa-analytics_en
The anti-google / pro-gdpr stuff is almost religious orthodoxy now in terms of its unwillingness to evaluate facts.
>https://ec.europa.eu/info/privacy-policy/europa-analytics_en
>The anti-google / pro-gdpr stuff is almost religious orthodoxy now in terms of its unwillingness to evaluate facts.
No, you can set your browser's do not track preference and this website will honor it (among the vanishingly few who do).
Browser preferences are opt-out currently. ie, users has to go set some flag. The GDPR requires informed affirmative consent.
"Consent must be freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous."
So having a website that track you unless you set some browser flag is not enough. Many folks say that you need specific consent to track. That is why there are so many pop-ups on EU websites.
They claim no cookie consent is needed because:
* tracking cookies are not used
* the data is not used for any other purpose than analytics
* a user cannot be tracked across days within the same website
https://matomo.org/faq/new-to-piwik/how-do-i-use-matomo-anal...
Reality is EU website sets a 13 month cookie, they clearly explain they will track a lot of data about you.
Anyways, some folks here claim that just using things for analytics is NOT an allowed exception to GDPR notice rules. I mention this to just again show that GDRP is not simple (despite claims here that it is "so easy").
What's the argument here?
>Most users don't care about a session cookie or whatever.
Where did you hear this? Most users don't know what a cookie is.
https://europa.eu/european-union/abouteuropa/privacy-policy/...
Snark aside, if you can't make money without stalking users, maybe you shouldn't be in business.
The issue folks have is many users if given a choice, will take the free service (instagram / tiktok / free gmail) in return for being tracked if they are given a choice.
Feel free to start up the business that doesn't do this (protonmail etc). But MAJOR services are built the other direction (ie, billions of users worldwide).
Yes, this would be covered by the GDPR and for good reason. If I join tonight's waiting list and provide a phone number in case they suddenly have a table become available I do not want that phone number to be reused for marketing spam down the line.
> The issue folks have is many users if given a choice, will take the free service [...] in return for being tracked if they are given a choice.
Apple's recent App Tracking Transparency stats suggest that when given a free choice, only 4% of users actually opt-in: https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/05/07/only-4-of-ios-use...
So clearly, when given the choice, most people would rather not be tracked. The problem the GDPR is trying to address is that people are not given the choice.
> But MAJOR services are built the other direction
There were plenty of businesses in the past that were built on basics that we now deem harmful. Back in the early 20th century, it was legal to sell radioactive water and market it as a miracle cure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radithor
Society has since determined this is harmful and outlawed that. The same thing is currently happening with environmental pollution, and the GDPR is trying to do the same for noxious business models on the web.
I mean I will still block it, but most people wouldn't.