Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Breakfast of runners-up.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                                                       

I accept for fuxake.

  (+3, -2)
(+3, -2)
  [vote for,
against]

This may well be baked, in which case this is simply a ruse to lure Halfbakers into telling me how to do it.

Every bloody webpage I visit now plonks an obscuring rectangle over the content, telling me how much they value my privacy and asking me if I'm happy to accept their cookies. If I clear my cookies at any time, every bloody webpage does it AGAIN. I really don't give a shit.

Why, therefore, can I not simply tell my browser that "whatever it is, just click accept or OK"? Or better yet, a setting that does this before the obscuring rectangle appears.

MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 23 2019

Use_20cookies_20to_...tes_20look_20better [hippo, Jun 24 2019]

[link]






       //can I not simply tell my browser that "whatever it is, just click accept or OK"?//   

       A wonderful recipe for extensive trojan, worm & other virus or malware infection.   

       Strongly recommended if you want things to get interesting.
Skewed, Jun 23 2019
  

       great service to humanxkind, those GDPR regulations
theircompetitor, Jun 23 2019
  

       A better idea would be for someone to create a 'feed the cookies with total bollox' piece of software. This would automatically deliver a continuous stream of fictitious drivel and gibberish to whatever those cookies are connected to.
xenzag, Jun 23 2019
  

       An even better idea would be to make the creation or intentional propagation of malware a capital offence. On the other hand, it disproportionately affects Windows users, so maybe not.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 23 2019
  

       An even better idea would be for someone to create malware that piggybacks off the cookie data sent from your PC to seriously fuck up the computers & servers accepting that cookie data from you, that'd give the bastards pause for thought.
Skewed, Jun 23 2019
  

       There are extensions for popular web browsers that have the purpose of getting rid of cookie notices. I can't recommend a particular one, because I don't use one myself (because the cookie notices are a tiny annoyance compared the annoyance in webpage loading that I inflict on myself by blocking scripts by default).   

       Relatedly, uBlock Origin* is good at blocking annoying elements on webpages with its "element picker" feature, though you have to choose what elements to block on each new website. (It's persistent. If you only want to hide an element once, use the "element zapper" feature instead.)   

       *Make sure you get uBlock Origin, not any of the other extensions named uBlock, which are from other developers and may not be trustworthy.
notexactly, Jun 23 2019
  

       [xenzag] //A better idea would be for someone to create a 'feed the cookies with total bollox' piece of software// - see link
hippo, Jun 24 2019
  

       //because the cookie notices are a tiny annoyance compared the annoyance in webpage loading that I inflict on myself by blocking scripts by default//   

       Agreed. Blocking all advertising and cookies often results in a faster loading time. 2 or 3 clicks vs megabytes of flashing annoying content.   

       The extensive opt-in notices are just compliant with modern EU data protection laws. It won't last forever though, the EU copyright protection laws kick in soon so that no company can afford to show content to the EU. The HB will close its doors to the EU etc. Some companies even faced with imposed data protection laws have just closed their sites to the EU "This website cannot be viewed in your country".   

       [-] What you would like is in fact something you should have voiced an opinion on many years ago.
bigsleep, Jun 24 2019
  

       I will go on record as saying that I am fully in favour of GDPR even though it has made my professional life an unending misery.
calum, Jun 24 2019
  

       really [calum] which part? the copyright part or the privacy part? What do you think is actually improved?
theircompetitor, Jun 24 2019
  

       // really [calum]//
Yes. In relation to both my support for GDPR and the part about my professional life being unending misery.
//which part?//
What do you mean?
//the copyright part or the privacy part?//
Ah, I see. I think you may be conflating GDPR with something else. GDPR is concerned with personal data.
//What do you think is actually improved?//
It mandates data minimisation, promotes data security, encourages organisations with large data pools to actually think about the personal data they have and why, it increases transparency for the uses that your data is put to, it increases the powers individuals have with reference to their personal data, it has created jobs (data professionals!). It has made professional life immeasurably harder for many people, yes. I am OK with that. Old men have yelled at cookie notifications. But no one has died.
calum, Jun 24 2019
  

       [-] rant. There are loads of browser extensions to hide the message, I use one called "I don't care about cookies" and it works fine.   

       [Skewed] there is a big difference between a browser interface box, and consent box which lives within the sandbox of an HTML page.   

       [xenxag] I know you don't have a technical background, but your annotation suggests you don't understand cookies. I wrote an explanation of the problem in simple terms a while back, see mitxela.com/rants (about halfway down the page) if you're interested.   

       [bigsleep] I too am upset about the impact the new copyright laws will have, but the suggestion that the HB will be affected is a little extreme. The laws were written by people with no understanding of the issues, and by the sound of it are completely unenforceable. The text-only content of the HB is unlikely to be affected.
mitxela, Jun 24 2019
  

       //there is a big difference between a browser interface box, and consent box which lives within the sandbox of an HTML page// That was sort of what I was thinking: any website that wants to feed me malware is not going to ask for my consent to cookies in the first place. I don't think I've ever not accepted cookies (or their privacy policy, or whatever else pops up), and if I want to I can just turn on the ask-before- accepting-cookies option in my browser.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 24 2019
  

       I've been thinking along similar lines. I want my browser to be able to navigate the torturous route of:   

       * yes, I would like to browse your website   

       * yes, you may keep a cookie to track my progress through your website but   

       * no, I do not authorise you to share the data you gather with others to build up a complete profile of where I have been on the internet, thank-you very much. If you can't agree to that level of privacy then I don't want your cookie.
st3f, Jun 24 2019
  

       I, like everyone else I presume, never click any affirmative action to consent (or, in another context, ever click a link called ‘learn more’, as I consider that I’ve learned about enough in my lifetime thanks). Instead I (like everyone else, etc) simply scroll around moving the content around the obscuring modal box, trying to read it through the now darkened areas around the edges. Most of the time I can get most of the information I thought I needed from a website, which is nearly none. In cases where this is not possible, for example, the background of the modal isn’t scrollable, or is curtailed, I simply back out and pretend that site doesn’t exist. No great loss…
…if it was that important, etc.
  

       In truth, I think the web died years ago and the least time I spend on port 80 or 443 the better life seems. All contemporary websites of this decade are simply intolerable.
Ian Tindale, Jun 24 2019
  

       Well, that's the Halfbakery told, then.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 24 2019
  

       Halfbakery is not even from this century.
Ian Tindale, Jun 24 2019
  

       // I (like everyone else, etc) simply scroll around...//

Sounds like I'm the only person who actually reads these things. I don't find it any great imposition. Only takes a few seconds & a couple of clicks. I, too, am in favour of GDPR. It's been far too long coming if you ask me. The copyright thing is bullshit though.

Also, what Skewed said inthe first comment.
DrBob, Jun 24 2019
  

       //The text-only content of the HB is unlikely to be affected.//   

       There are two parts to that.   

       1) People post links with extracts. Those fall under the category of 'Link Tax' which would require a full audit of all links visible in the EU.   

       2) Large software companies use databases of "all code produced ever" to avoid copyright claims against them. If a software developer has cloned 10 lines from a website, it will be flagged during an automated audit and the developer will be asked to rewrite.   

       You have to wonder whether quoting of poetry, song lyrics, screenplays etc will also fall under the new draconian copyright legislation.   

       Oddly, like [calum] (not implying calum is odd), I also support the GDPR stuff and even the EU copyright law ... in principle. But unfortunately law makers (in the EU it means a small think tank) don't understand internet technology so the appalling wordings could mean the death of the internet rather than appropriately compensating copyright holders.   

       You could get more cynical about it and think that its a free speech oppression move by the EU. If you follow the red pill channels on my profile page you'll be aware that a knitting circle website is censoring any pro-Trump speech because they must all be white supremacists.   

       I'm seriously wondering what percentage of the population are still clinging to rational thought because lawmakers and the mainstream seem to have seriously lost their shit.
bigsleep, Jun 24 2019
  

       //Halfbakery is not even from this century//   

       One of the fun things about straddling a century is being able to say things like that & make it sound like your over a hundred years old when there's really only less 20 years in it.
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //The text-only content of the HB is unlikely to be affected.//   

       And the links themselves shouldn't be an issue either, because they're just links, the issue (if or when there is one) will be with the sight hosting what the links link to rather than with the bakery shirley? The bakery should be fine.
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //not implying calum is odd//   

       Why not?
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //a knitting circle website is censoring any pro-Trump speech because they must all be white supremacists//   

       Interesting, I'll remember not to join any knitting circles then, white supremacists, not my cup of tea.
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //what percentage of the population are still clinging to rational thought//   

       We had a poll back in 2016 to answer that very question, apparently it's around 52%.
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //when there's really only less 20 years in it//   

       Less than 20 years before my birth their were bombs falling around Europe. Younger people may remember there not being an internet at all.   

       I discovered the HTTP protocol (Tim Berners-Lee) in the early nineties, so yes the HB spanning two thirds of the internet era with only mininal changes is impressive.   

       [Skewed] you must now confess and do the walk of shame. Easy mistake to make though.   

       (Catching up with a few more annos)   

       //white supremacists, not my cup of tea//   

       Nor anyones. The people to really watch are the ones throwing labels around without any justification at all. I like to see concrete proof; innocent until proven guilty - that kind of thing.   

       //We had a poll back in 2016 to answer that very question, apparently it's around 52%/   

       Source ? Oh nevermind, its going to be a tabloid survey like "bacon kills!".
bigsleep, Jun 24 2019
  

       //Younger people may remember there not being an internet//   

       Ok I admit it, that would be me, I remember Pong when it first came out, a bright orange box with 2 wheel-paddles, but it was more than 20 years since the bombs were falling for me, though there were bomb craters in London still that my dad used to play in when he was a nipper.
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       //Source ? Oh nevermind, its going to be a tabloid survey like "bacon kills!"//   

       [Watches the tumbleweed blowing by four feet over [biggie]'s head] [Files datum that [Big] 'probably' isn't UK for future reference]
Skewed, Jun 24 2019
  

       Hi Skewed ! Seems we are both a bit bored and can't sleep.   

       //"bacon kills!"//   

       If you are interested in those kind of surveys, do a deep dive into the effectiveness of epidemiology - the 'science' (demands massive air quotes) behind a lot of modern pharmaceuticals. We all know *now* that opioids shouldn't be prescribed for headaches, but what about statins and the rest ? Its shocking.
bigsleep, Jun 24 2019
  

       Not having an obvious user level close button on the popup window, one that gives a definite script truncation without data entry, irks me.
wjt, Jun 25 2019
  

       //"bacon kills!"//

I misread this as "bacon skills!", and thought, "yes, I have bacon skills".
hippo, Jun 25 2019
  

       Your confusing 'desires' with 'skills', red or brown?
Skewed, Jun 25 2019
  

       I don't really get it. sure, companies make money on your data, and you get free services in exchange. To the extent that data is used for marketing -- duh, that's what you want -- and to the extent that data can be used for evil purposes -- that's MUCH more likely to come from a government than from the private sector, and the government already has separate means to track you, which it surely employs.   

       You're at much higher risk from public shaming and HR research of your publicly stated opinions than from anything GDPR is protecting you from.
theircompetitor, Jun 25 2019
  

       [hippo] Do mean F. Bacon skills ?. What sort of skills does bacon have? Hold water, crackle and sizzle, good at disappearing.
wjt, Jun 25 2019
  

       No, no - just normal bacon preparation skills, mostly frying-related.
hippo, Jun 25 2019
  

       here's a real case -- we're a small company -- four people. We're inundated with Google dropping our games & apps because they use advertising -- of course, vanilla Google in-game ads -- thus using device identifying parameters (incidentally forced on us by Google's SDK) -- because our store listing for the games does not contain an official privacy policy link. This is a new Google policy change since GDPR -- forced on US consumers by Googles' desire to not have to do this N times for N countries.   

       So...I take a vanila privacy policy downloaded off the web, without reading it, post it on my website for these games, which no one goes to -- and update every store game listing with said link -- and voila, my games are relisted.   

       Now, what was the sense of that, who was harmed by the absence of said policy, and further, who is helped by me going through this process. That's the real result of privacy regulation.   

       The US Constitution already protects against unreasonable search and seizures. I'm ok with case law adjusting this as is required by technology and is reasonable. I do not need these added regulations, and they are not designed to help me as either a consumer or a producer.   

       It is this kind of masturbation, which definitionally favors those who have the resources to navigate it, that accomplishes precisely the opposite of helping the consumer
theircompetitor, Jun 25 2019
  

       It sounds - and I may be misreading - like you are cross because google's approach to implementation of GDPR meant you had to do a bit of extra work.
calum, Jun 25 2019
  

       yes. But it was entirely predictable that GDPR will result in just such burdens across the landscape. When actual benefit is demonstrated I stand ready to note it
theircompetitor, Jun 25 2019
  

       I use a VPN. I use a script blocker and an ad blocker. There have been a few things I'm unable to see this way, but only a few. On reputable sites or disreputable ones that I like I selectively allow the scripts. I also frequently clear all cookies and site preferences and change zoom level. These measures, I feel, leave me much safer and harder to track.   

       A nice side effect is I almost never see an obscuring screen over the site. If I see one I click the obscuration and tell my ad blocker to block it. This almost always works, and only doesn't if the site is specifically hostile to it. And if they're that uncooperative well, there's always a different site that has the same information.   

       The funny thing is the less likely a site is to work with my script and ad blockers the less likely it is to be valuable and safe. The only exceptions are the New York Times and Youtube as of about a month ago. These sites don't work properly for me unless I unblock all scripts and ads. I'm unwilling to do this and so on my internet Youtube and the New York Times site don't exist.
Voice, Jun 26 2019
  

       "You've declared your application does not target children under 13. Google will review your store listing to make sure that it doesn't unintentionally appeal to children under 13.   

       The following question asks if you think your store listing could unintentionally appeal to children. Learn more   

       If you answer 'Yes', the 'Not designed for children' label will be shown next to your app on Google Play.   

       If you answer 'No', and Google disagrees with your answer, you won't be able to update your app.   

       To resolve this, you will need to either:   

       Answer 'Yes' to this question, and consent to the 'Not designed for children' label being shown next to your app Change your store listing so that it doesn't appeal to children. This may include your app description, icon, and screenshots. Change the target age group of your app to include children, and comply with the Families policy"   

       Does Disney need to stop using Mickey in their advertising? Does Candy Crush appeal to children? If my app list recipes, would I need to disclaim that you should not use it if you are on a diet or take certain medication?   

       Does the camera app appeal to children under 13? Or do those not take selfies? How can Google advertise the phone with pictures of teens using it?   

       All this to have Google act as the parent that should disallow their kids not only the inconvenience of not buying in-game products, but perhaps using the device at all.   

       Yes, no doubt humanity's condition has been improved immeasurably due to this.
theircompetitor, Jun 26 2019
  

       //When actual benefit is demonstrated I stand ready to note it//
You have certainly had the downside of the impact of GDPR, though mediated through google's approach to risk mitigation as much as anything. You had the downside because it affected you as a (potential) data controller / processor, rather than as a data subject. If you're not a data subject, there is only work to do, and no upside.
  

       But if you are a data subject, the benefits are plentiful. There is a limit to what I can say here (because my account here could be linked to my professional internet presence and too much specificity could result in people putting two and two together and getting exactly four and ==> me losing my job) but I can say, without breaching client confidentiality, that I have seen shit being done with personal data that would make your balls stand on end and your hair shrivel up into your body. And the reason that I saw it is because GDPR was coming and people realised they maybe needed to do something about compliance. That shit is not being done any more and people are wise to the concept that it can't be done here any longer. This is a good thing. But if you're stateside and staying stateside, then you're never going to see the benefits.
calum, Jun 26 2019
  

       Wait - there's a Halfbaker with a JOB??
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 26 2019
  

       Retired. Does that count?
blissmiss, Jun 26 2019
  

       Somehow I’ve still got my job, it just turned two years old last week, and it has migrated into the desired UX/UI designer role (having first had to get rid of the existing designer early on) except one that also does lots of SVG, CSS, Elm and React.   

       However, as I’ve never heard of a job lasting this long, I suppose it’ll soon be time to think about starting another business, except this time with some proper seed funding and a product that actually brings in money. Soon. Very soon.
Ian Tindale, Jun 26 2019
  

       They have UI designers nowadays? That's progress. I had a UI a while ago and they just gave me antibiotics.
MaxwellBuchanan, Jun 26 2019
  

       //personal data that would make your balls stand on end and your hair shrivel up//   

       In a former life, when I worked on hospitality software, I once stumbled on a database where a convention of endoscopists had been booked alongside a wedding party. Because of the GDPR, I will now have to write the obvious bedroom farce by hand, instead of machine-generating it from the reservation details of real people and blackmailing them with drafts of the script.
pertinax, Jun 27 2019
  

       [calum], I'm one of the people that started mobile advertising industry, and when Google bought Admob, I was generating about 10% of their business, and testified on Google's behalf to the FTC (as they were reviewing the merger), I doubt I'd be very surprised. The early mobile advertising's industry fight against fraud paid for much of the advancement on personalization that occured in subsequent years   

       I get what you're saying, but I still think the key protections are the protections against unreasonable search and seizure, i.e. against government action.   

       For those of us of a certain age -- I'd speculate many of us here -- the standard joke was why do I have to see tampax ads -- we finally got to the age when you search for a particular power tool, and you next see it advertised when you use Facebook -- and omg, that's the biggest transgression against my privacy!   

       Fighting against targeted advertising does not help the consumer, and does not help the advertiser. In very narrow cases -- discriminatory cases -- you do have to make sure that the advertiser doesn't violate current law -- but doing that was already illegal before GDPR.   

       Honestly -- I'm much more affected by the insane # of telemarketing calls that had exploded over the years -- then anything -- I'd prioritize that much higher.
theircompetitor, Jun 27 2019
  

       //I still think the key protections are the protections against unreasonable search and seizure, i.e. against government action.//
Fair enough. For the record, the ball standing / hair shriveling shit was in large majority carried out by private enterprise and in almost all cases was not concerned with advertising.
  

       //Honestly -- I'm much more affected by the insane # of telemarketing calls that had exploded over the years -- then anything -- I'd prioritize that much higher//
Allow me to introduce you to the EU's Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive 2002 (implemented in the UK as the The Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (yes, it's generally abbreviated to PECR (pronounced as you'd expect / fear))), which deals with telemarketing (and other unsolicited forms of marketing) and is about to be replaced by the EU's ePrivacy regulation which will (should) fuck up telemarketers real good.
calum, Jun 27 2019
  

       //I ...testified on Google's behalf to the FTC //   

       I irrevocably hate you.
Voice, Jun 27 2019
  

       Feel free to use Bing
theircompetitor, Jun 28 2019
  

       //insane # of telemarketing calls//   

       Had I casual access to military drones there might have been a non-insignificant danger head office of certain companies hiring telemarketers last year being rubble strewn craters now. Delisting my phone seems to have mostly done the trick but friends & family now can't 1471 calls & call me back if they screen them.   

       //(should) fuck up telemarketers real good//   

       That's nice, does it include the death penalty for offending CEO's? if not it doesn't go far enough.
Skewed, Jun 28 2019
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle