[denton-scratch]

"the banners are malicious compliance."

I agree. But I don't think it's because adtech want you to think privacy is shit; I think it's because by compelling you to click, they can run Javascript in the context of a user gesture.

I want a plugin that automatically says "OK" to cookie banners. My browser already blocks 3rd-party cookies. It only allows session cookies. Cookie banners are like fire-hydrant CAPTCHAs - they masssively increase the friction that web users have to deal with.

They also legitimise other kinds of popup window that websites present. I've noticed more and more popups appearing on first visit to a site, inviting me to subscribe to a newsletter or whatever. You often see a cookie banner, followed by a newsletter popup, followed by a Google login popup. Who knows, maybe there's a traffic-lights CAPTCHA.

Then finally you're into the site, and it turns out to be Washpo or NYT, and you can't read the article anyway, because it's paywalled.

Can we have our open web back please, mister?

[ginko]

>I want a plugin that automatically says "OK" to cookie banners.

Why would you want that? Even if you delete 3rd-party cookies that would still allow tracking companies to log your IP and track you through some other shady means which you've now consented to.

[denton-scratch]

Because it makes no difference to my assurance-level which button I click. There's no way of knowing what they do serverside with your form submission (and it nearly always is a form submission).

Cookie approval has to be under the control of the user, not the website. So it has to be done by the browser or an extension. So if I have user-controlled cookie-approval, I might as well click "OK" on the form - the site might treat me better if I do.

[loloquwowndueo]

“ I want a plugin that automatically says "OK" to cookie banners.”

Try “I don’t care about cookies” :)

https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/

[bwindels]

Is this extension trustworthy? It is "recommended" and says GPL3 but there is no link to the source code anywhere.

[tcit]

The author doesn't publish the extension sources. https://reddit.com/comments/bru6wd/comment/eohtox3

[grey_earthling]

Their argument is that the extension as it's distributed is essentially a zip file containing the source code.

[cratermoon]

I don't think that's quite in compliance with GPL3, but I'm not a lawyer. The bundled release artifact doesn't allow someone to build the extension, and I think GPL3 takes that into account. If I have a Java program, I have the bytecode, and unless it's been run through and obfuscator, I can pretty easily recreate the Java code. But the GPL3 doesn't count that as compliant.

[denton-scratch]

Thanks - I'm looking into that.

[joepie91_]

A much better option is Consent-o-Matic, which will reject cookies for you automatically.