|
I pretty much prefer to have a popup that I have to "accept" prior to the website I visit can "legally" start storing identifiable information about me, it allows me to just close the webpage if it's not something essential I'm visiting. Like 90% of the links on the web, lets say more or less, are not really worth my data, sort of just a "let me check" curiosity, that 99% of the time, after you would finish the article/post wtv, you would go "that was another turd".
This doesn't mean it's completely effective or not at all but it's at least some legal backing/precedent. I still hope we'll be able at some point to come up with a more refined protocol than http (or better sandboxing of the browser/device), where you could selectively reject loading JS resources and where resources would need to explicitly say what they were gathering, where pixel tracking would need to be announced (and only after your consent would those resources run/load). Totally ok with the site not loading either if you didn't gave the permissions. Probably never going to happen, but that would be a true handshake, "I want to check this out", RE: "Sure, we want your location, track your navigation across the website and we'll sell this as part of a dataset, including your IP, so that someone else then can buy several different datasets and create a proper picture of your activity", "Sorry, thanks, not interested". (and yes, it would need to be written in a way that's understandable, not 5 pages of crap). The same applied to mobile phones/computers/apps. Or better yet, a browser/device API, where you (the developer) would need to declare all resources you wanted to access (DEVICE_IP_ADDRESS, DEVICE_LOCATION, MOUSE_POSITION etc) this would compile all of them into legible manifest that you could read before it being un-sandboxed and allowed to run. Any attempt to read such information from the browser/device where one of those permissions weren't granted would return null (might be the best argument for the existence of null). |