6 ms·

We wouldn't need a dickover at all if governments didn’t regulate it either.

by kcplate 4mo ago

xigoi 4mo ago
But then sites could spy fn users without consent.
- kcplate 4mo ago
  So make it illegal to spy on users…not this “wishy-washy ask for their permission” first. If spying is the crux of the problem why not just solve it? Instead we are presented with some lukewarm have it both ways BS where the only solution to truly give you safe harbor is present the cookie acknowledgment. Good corporate lawyers will demand the dickover even if you do not use cookies at all just to cover the company’s ass.
happymellon 4mo ago
Even with the regulations, we don't need a dickover. The dickover is purely spite from the websites.
- kcplate 4mo ago
  > The dickover is purely spite from the websites. No, it’s a legal CYA that provides safe harbor in case you are accused of the behavior. If a law says you need to inform, your lawyers will demand you inform even if zero cookies are used on the site.
  - happymellon 4mo ago
    > your lawyers will demand you inform even if zero cookies are used on the site. How is not bothering to understand your business, using it as an excuse to hassle your customers in the worst way they have so far conceived and blaming a law that doesn't talk about cookie banners NOT spite?
    - kcplate 4mo ago
      > How is not bothering to understand your business If you are a lawyer how technically competent would you need to be to have complete assurance that your engineering team is now and always will be in full compliance to eliminate all risk to allow a lack of consent. Or…you just drop the Ack on site and not worry over it. Thats not spite, it’s compliance convenience. The method of compliance may may not be perfect, but it addresses the legal problem. There wouldn't be a legal issue without the law. This is not a chicken or the egg situation. No law, no need to inform even if no tracking cookies exist. > hassle your customers in the worst way they have so far conceived By informing and asking for a acknowledgment? That seems pretty benign compared to a ton of things I have seen over the last nearly three decades.

We wouldn't need a dickover at all if governments didn’t regulate it either.

by kcplate 4mo ago

We wouldn't need a dickover at all if governments didn’t regulate it either.

xigoi 4mo ago

But then sites could spy fn users without consent.

kcplate 4mo ago
So make it illegal to spy on users…not this “wishy-washy ask for their permission” first. If spying is the crux of the problem why not just solve it? Instead we are presented with some lukewarm have it both ways BS where the only solution to truly give you safe harbor is present the cookie acknowledgment. Good corporate lawyers will demand the dickover even if you do not use cookies at all just to cover the company’s ass.

happymellon 4mo ago

Even with the regulations, we don't need a dickover. The dickover is purely spite from the websites.

kcplate 4mo ago
> The dickover is purely spite from the websites. No, it’s a legal CYA that provides safe harbor in case you are accused of the behavior. If a law says you need to inform, your lawyers will demand you inform even if zero cookies are used on the site.
- happymellon 4mo ago
  > your lawyers will demand you inform even if zero cookies are used on the site. How is not bothering to understand your business, using it as an excuse to hassle your customers in the worst way they have so far conceived and blaming a law that doesn't talk about cookie banners NOT spite?
  - kcplate 4mo ago
    > How is not bothering to understand your business If you are a lawyer how technically competent would you need to be to have complete assurance that your engineering team is now and always will be in full compliance to eliminate all risk to allow a lack of consent. Or…you just drop the Ack on site and not worry over it. Thats not spite, it’s compliance convenience. The method of compliance may may not be perfect, but it addresses the legal problem. There wouldn't be a legal issue without the law. This is not a chicken or the egg situation. No law, no need to inform even if no tracking cookies exist. > hassle your customers in the worst way they have so far conceived By informing and asking for a acknowledgment? That seems pretty benign compared to a ton of things I have seen over the last nearly three decades.