6 ms·

Thanks for sharing this! I've always wondered why the browsers themselves can't implement this type of feature to improve the web. I assume it's some legal fact

Thanks for sharing this! I've always wondered why the browsers themselves can't implement this type of feature to improve the web. I assume it's some legal factor.

avhception 2y ago
Firefox has the ability to send the "do not track" header iirc, but websites chose to ignore this. They'll rather nag the users.
- mort96 2y ago
  Well yeah, obviously? Why would anyone ever respect the "do not track" header? The whole point is to get people to click "accept all" out of fatigue or apathy!
arzke 2y ago
Brave does this for about two years now: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...
- gljiva 2y ago
  Brave just disables the cookie banners (they don't even load), while this fills such forms if I understood correctly. Somehow I get very targeted ads in other apps after using Brave, so I tend to use firefox-based browsers for personal (i.e. any not work-related) stuff.
munk-a 2y ago
For Chromium based browsers... why would the advertising based company make it any easier for users to opt out of advertising. The optimal resolution for Alphabet is users clicking "Accept All" and writing their member of the EU Parliament in frustration.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  A risky strategy. There's a moderate chance that the EU comes to its senses and mandates an automated way to opt out of cookies.
  - beardyw 2y ago
    What, like a do not track http header say. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track
    - IshKebab 2y ago
      Probably not. It will probably be more than a single flag. And also it has to be something backed by legislation. Do Not Track was a dumb idea because it had no teeth.
- 28304283409234 2y ago
  As a die-hard Firefox user do note that it too exists solely because of advertising.

6 ms·

Thanks for sharing this! I've always wondered why the browsers themselves can't implement this type of feature to improve the web. I assume it's some legal fact

by blakeburch 2y ago

Thanks for sharing this! I've always wondered why the browsers themselves can't implement this type of feature to improve the web. I assume it's some legal factor.

avhception 2y ago
Firefox has the ability to send the "do not track" header iirc, but websites chose to ignore this. They'll rather nag the users.
- mort96 2y ago
  Well yeah, obviously? Why would anyone ever respect the "do not track" header? The whole point is to get people to click "accept all" out of fatigue or apathy!
arzke 2y ago
Brave does this for about two years now: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...
- gljiva 2y ago
  Brave just disables the cookie banners (they don't even load), while this fills such forms if I understood correctly. Somehow I get very targeted ads in other apps after using Brave, so I tend to use firefox-based browsers for personal (i.e. any not work-related) stuff.
munk-a 2y ago
For Chromium based browsers... why would the advertising based company make it any easier for users to opt out of advertising. The optimal resolution for Alphabet is users clicking "Accept All" and writing their member of the EU Parliament in frustration.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  A risky strategy. There's a moderate chance that the EU comes to its senses and mandates an automated way to opt out of cookies.
  - beardyw 2y ago
    What, like a do not track http header say. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track
    - IshKebab 2y ago
      Probably not. It will probably be more than a single flag. And also it has to be something backed by legislation. Do Not Track was a dumb idea because it had no teeth.
- 28304283409234 2y ago
  As a die-hard Firefox user do note that it too exists solely because of advertising.