Intrusive cookie messages
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
You can thank the EU, right? Although a ton of US based sites do it too. It's probably for the same reason as why they put warning labels on clothing irons that it may be hot. Too afraid of being sued.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
You can thank the EU, right? Although a ton of US based sites do it too. It's probably for the same reason as why they put warning labels on clothing irons that it may be hot. Too afraid of being sued.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
warning labels on clothing irons
I saw this once - "Do not iron clothes while wearing" I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
A third? Some of them are up to 75% now. With another 20% for the "Please install our mobile crapp" banner. Anything left over is part of the first of many full-height banner ads scattered throughout the content. But how else do you expect them to make money out of two paragraphs of "news" and a link to an article on another site? :laugh:
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
warning labels on clothing irons
I saw this once - "Do not iron clothes while wearing" I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
I agree. I'd also ban driver seat belts and airbags, and replace them with a 6" steel spike in the middle of the steering wheel with a prominent warning that "if you have an accident, you will die". I suspect that traffic would be a lot more polite and careful, and probably move a lot better as well. Once the initial fatalities had happened, of course. Fewer drink drivers as well , after a month or so. And good for the economy as well. (At least, once section of the economy)
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
I agree. I'd also ban driver seat belts and airbags, and replace them with a 6" steel spike in the middle of the steering wheel with a prominent warning that "if you have an accident, you will die". I suspect that traffic would be a lot more polite and careful, and probably move a lot better as well. Once the initial fatalities had happened, of course. Fewer drink drivers as well , after a month or so. And good for the economy as well. (At least, once section of the economy)
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
and replace them with a 6" steel spike in the middle of the steering wheel
What a wonderful idea, I'm a great believer in Darwinism (I have already bred ;P ).
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
Unfortunately, GDPR does not just apply to EU companies, it applies to services provided to EU citizens and residents. It is very specific about the requirements for explicit and excessively informed consent to use almost any user provided data. The penalties for non-compliance are quite severe, hence the wacky huge notifications. We tried to keep it simple, but then we don't track our users, so our cookies have minimal data to worry about.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
I agree. I'd also ban driver seat belts and airbags, and replace them with a 6" steel spike in the middle of the steering wheel with a prominent warning that "if you have an accident, you will die". I suspect that traffic would be a lot more polite and careful, and probably move a lot better as well. Once the initial fatalities had happened, of course. Fewer drink drivers as well , after a month or so. And good for the economy as well. (At least, once section of the economy)
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Oh and don't forget the cattle prod lodged in the seat for those that don't use there turn signals.
Got my site back up after my time in the woods! JaxCoder.com
-
Oh and don't forget the cattle prod lodged in the seat for those that don't use there turn signals.
Got my site back up after my time in the woods! JaxCoder.com
Well, I suspect we'd lose all BMW drivers in the first week anyway, so there would be plenty of Blinker Fluid to go round ... ;)
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
A mixture of web sites trying to get the most out of your visit and the law attempting at giving you the chance to prevent that. My favorite time of the internet was before privacy law got hold (because it wasn't needed). A web site had a session cookie, but that's about it. With the gradual introduction of tracking, the simple banner became more or less mandatory. With the absolutely sprawling data collection & sharing practice of nowadays, the EU privacy directive became as draconian as it is because it had to be as the web industry has shown that it will do everything it can within a legal frame, no matter the moral implications. I don't think that there's anything preventing web sites from displaying a simple "Do you accept privacy-infringing cookies"-banner with a clear NO option disabling everything except the choice not to be pestered by data leeches. But instead, they give you fine-grained controls most likely to lull you into giving in by overwhelming you with options.
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
European law, GDPR, that went into effect about a year ago. As a European I'm annoyed too. On the other hand, companies are abusing the data they secretly collect about consumers, sometimes even for paid services, and this is one of the measures taken by the EU to make it more transparent what data a service collects and what they do with that data. I guess it's annoying, but not all bad either ;)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
They are a pain. I have given up on some sites because their cookies screen wouldnt go away on mobile.
-
Is it just me...? More and more (it seems especially over the past couple of weeks?) many sites are putting up increasingly intrusive cookie permission pop-ups. What used to be a simple, narrow banner at the top of the page or an animated small slide-down somewhere, has now become a full, or almost full, screen div that obliterates most, or even all, of the page content. The cookie messages frequently include stupid statements such as "these cookies are essential to proper operation of the site" when all it is is a tracking cookie. Half the time I can't even tell if I really want to visit the site / read the article because the sodding cookie message hides everything else. Some give the option to accept cookies or to decline them; but many just have the option to accept or to not use the site. I realise the site owner has every right to put whatever conditions they like on their content, but it really winds me up. I'm finding that up to a dozen times a day I'm just right-clicking and choosing "Inspect element", then deleting the offending HTML element(s). This probably has no effect on the placement of cookies but I'm darned if I'm going to play the stupid games that the site authors clearly want to get involved in.
I don't care about cookies - Chrome Web Store[^] The main problem about all this is - I care about privacy. Now I am left with two choices : Click the cookie or GDPR pop-up and navigate, or leave the site. What did improve now ? I cannot prevent the sites from collecting data, but only get warned that websites collect data. Which they all do. This GDPR thing is the most useless thing ever, a wrong solution to a real problem. What I would like is - If I do not subscribe to cookies or collecting data, then let me navigate your website WITHOUT COLLECTING THE DAMN DATA OR PUTTING COOKIES EVERYWHERE.
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I think if they removed all the warning labels, mother nature would take over, and things would be better for the survivors.
I agree. I'd also ban driver seat belts and airbags, and replace them with a 6" steel spike in the middle of the steering wheel with a prominent warning that "if you have an accident, you will die". I suspect that traffic would be a lot more polite and careful, and probably move a lot better as well. Once the initial fatalities had happened, of course. Fewer drink drivers as well , after a month or so. And good for the economy as well. (At least, once section of the economy)
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
And good for the economy as well.
Don't forget the environment.
OriginalGriff wrote:
with a prominent warning
Remove the warning sign. India is going to benefit the most.
GKP1992 wrote:
Remove the warning sign.
It's not about randomly killing people, it's about adding a little chlorine to the gene pool...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Unfortunately, GDPR does not just apply to EU companies, it applies to services provided to EU citizens and residents. It is very specific about the requirements for explicit and excessively informed consent to use almost any user provided data. The penalties for non-compliance are quite severe, hence the wacky huge notifications. We tried to keep it simple, but then we don't track our users, so our cookies have minimal data to worry about.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
Matthew@work wrote:
We tried to keep it simple, but then we don't track our users, so our cookies have minimal data to worry about.
You sadly are one of the very few exceptions. So KUDOS and my Gratitude for it (and many other things). THANK YOU I am more than glad to come here and be a part of it :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::rose::rose::rose:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
GKP1992 wrote:
Remove the warning sign.
It's not about randomly killing people, it's about adding a little chlorine to the gene pool...
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
European law, GDPR, that went into effect about a year ago. As a European I'm annoyed too. On the other hand, companies are abusing the data they secretly collect about consumers, sometimes even for paid services, and this is one of the measures taken by the EU to make it more transparent what data a service collects and what they do with that data. I guess it's annoying, but not all bad either ;)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
abusing the data
Ya, it's terrible. I see ads of things I am actually interested in. Ugghh. It's the worst. ;)
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
abusing the data
Ya, it's terrible. I see ads of things I am actually interested in. Ugghh. It's the worst. ;)
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
The worst part is how you're being manipulated. It goes beyond just showing you things you're interested in. For example, they can tell if someone is pregnant by their browse and search behavior. They single out all these pregnant women and give them special offers, diapers and such. When you're pregnant and all of a sudden you get these offers you feel like you're being watched, which you are, but shops came up with a clever way to pretend like they're not watching... They add some generic stuff with the offer so it seems like the diapers are just on sale by coincidence while they really aren't. Now why pregnant women, study has shown that pregnant women are more susceptible to change their brand. So if they always shop at A this is the time to switch to B if B offers them diapers. And while they're out diaper shopping at B they might just as well get their other non-kids stuff (groceries) from B as well. Pregnant women might seem harmless enough, but they do this with people who are addicted, with children who don't fully know what they're doing yet, with people who are somehow vulnerable or susceptible... You might say it's "their choice" to buy or not, but not everyone is that strong (all the time) and the manipulation is clever. It gets scarier when you think that there's been a research (true or not) that has shown companies used all this data to get Trump elected. Not to turn this into a political discussion, but they're able to show exactly the news items they want you to see for their political agenda's. They know you haven't made up your mind yet, but they want you to vote for Trump, so you get to see "SCANDAL! Hillary has private emails" and "Trump hugs a cute baby", but they leave out "Hillary has done good things" and "Trump's charity is a fraud". Now again, I don't know how much of the election part is true, but I believe it could very well be true, and that's already scary enough.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
