|
|
|
|
|
by chris-orgmenta
884 days ago
|
|
That ain't us.... kind of. That's the websites deciding to follow the letter of the law (or a spiteful, capitalist interpretation, taking it right to the line) instead of the spirit of the law. OK, unintended consequences of legislation. But those cookie banners are not mandated, exactly. They don't need to be there. It's the companies deciding to do it that way, so they can keep gobbling data. It's like if the building companies implemented the 2nd staircase, but only so they could measure who is going up and down it. Not for saving lives. If they were opt in, or unnecessary tracking wasn't implemented in the first place, then the banners could be elegant or gone. But I do agree that the legislation (especially the ultra focus on cookies specifically) was... blinkered & short sighted. |
|
If only a few websites had the banner, then maybe I'd blame those websites. But when they virtually all do, I blame the law.