Comment by tezza
1 day ago
Even well meaning bodies like TFL (Transport for London) have cookie warnings that impede the actual access of the website.
Need to look up a bus time? Full screen cookie consent with accept buttons drawn OFF THE SCREEN.
1 day ago
Even well meaning bodies like TFL (Transport for London) have cookie warnings that impede the actual access of the website.
Need to look up a bus time? Full screen cookie consent with accept buttons drawn OFF THE SCREEN.
They obviously aren't well-meaning if they're endlessly tracking everything you do
Sloppy, non-privacy-preserving "analytics" set up by some communications intern ≠ malice. They can mean well and still do a poor job. True privacy on the internet is notoriously hard.
Sorry, no. Code doesn't magically go from the intern's workstation to live. If the chain of incompetence is that long, then the most generous read is that they don't care
I don't think you can handwave responsibility like that, even if your theoretical were true it's still the responsibility of the org.
More likely it was designed by some firm that put the cookie banner there because "that is just what you do in current year"
One of our sites that don't use any kind of tracking or cookies other then a site preference cookie, got so many complaints that we had to put up a cookie banner that simply says "we do not use any tracking cookies"...
1 reply →
Yes and my "peanut allergy friendly" cookies say "may contain peanuts" because that's just what you do
Literally the point is that sites are showing the banner by default practice even when they are not tracking. You understand this!
Your kind comes into every one of these threads and says some version of "well if they weren't tracking then they'd have nothing to worry about and no need to show a banner", but that is so obviously not true to anyone who uses the web. You absolutely do not need to defend a law that is not working.