Hacker News Reader

Comment by blakeburch | Hacker News Reader

Thanks for sharing this! I've always wondered why the browsers themselves can't implement this type of feature to improve the web. I assume it's some legal factor.

View on HN

For Chromium based browsers... why would the advertising based company make it any easier for users to opt out of advertising. The optimal resolution for Alphabet is users clicking "Accept All" and writing their member of the EU Parliament in frustration.

A risky strategy. There's a moderate chance that the EU comes to its senses and mandates an automated way to opt out of cookies.

What, like a do not track http header say.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track

Probably not. It will probably be more than a single flag.

And also it has to be something backed by legislation. Do Not Track was a dumb idea because it had no teeth.

As a die-hard Firefox user do note that it too exists solely because of advertising.

Firefox has the ability to send the "do not track" header iirc, but websites chose to ignore this. They'll rather nag the users.

Well yeah, obviously? Why would anyone ever respect the "do not track" header? The whole point is to get people to click "accept all" out of fatigue or apathy!

Brave does this for about two years now: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...

Brave just disables the cookie banners (they don't even load), while this fills such forms if I understood correctly. Somehow I get very targeted ads in other apps after using Brave, so I tend to use firefox-based browsers for personal (i.e. any not work-related) stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com