fixed

  • flint@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    2 months ago

    In my experience uBlock origin doesn’t really get rid of cookie consent banners/dark patterns. Damn good at bonking ads though.

      • flint@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Aah, you are right. Lazy me actually never looked at those. Now I did and it seems to work just fine enabling the Annoyances > Cookie Banners.

        • nutbutter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          2nd panel means you have to do it again and again for every new website you visit, or if you clear cookies regularly. Using the ublock addon, you have to enable this setting once, and it is persistent across sessions.

    • zerozaku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Also getting rid of cookie banners doesn’t mean the site won’t track with third party cookies. The cookies are ON by default and until you tell them to turn it OFF, they keep the cookies on.

      • flint@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s a good point. However in the EU it should be the opposite - otherwise the site is violating GDPR.

        Sometimes I have a feeling sites do whatever they want anyway regardless of bow many dark patterns I click through to find the “no” and “off” buttons because there are no real repercussions. Just like the “do not track” request and “robots.txt” are essentially useless.

        • zerozaku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          However in the EU it should be the opposite - otherwise the site is violating GDPR.

          Damn then that’s great for EU users. You can really see how scummy these companies are on how they treat GDPR and non-GDPR countries.

  • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 month ago

    “ NOOO YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND BRO! OUR BUSINESS MODEL DOESN’T WORK IF WE CAN’T DO MASS SURVELIANCE BRO!”

  • BeUnique@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 month ago

    That shit should be illegal. Accept all / reject all. That’s it. If somebody is disabling cookies, literally nobody in the entire world wants any of them! “Oh yeah, please, only keep my location data but not the data about my purchase decisions”…

    • WrathEnchanter@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I have good news for you: In the EU (which forced everyone to have the cookie-accept-banners in the first place) it IS illegal.

      • rmuk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        The EU didn’t force anyone to have the cookie banners. If the site only uses nessecary cookies - the kind you can’t turn off in the prompt - there doesn’t need to any prompts because that’s perfectly fine. The intrusive, obnoxious and deliberate confusing popups are from data harvesters throwing a tantrum because they can’t stalk you every waking second any more, and complying in the most malicious and disrespectful way they can.

        Cookie banners are nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with tech-bros.

        • WrathEnchanter@europe.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I mean… The EU could’ve also said ‘no privacy invasive cookies’ instead of ‘cookie Banner if privacy invasive cookies’. I don’t think being able to disable is bad, I think they didn’t go far enough (and also of course datapeople only comply in the most malicious way possible. It’s literally their job, a job that shouldn’t exist.)

          • bless@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Even the idea of tightening regulations for igaming has many EU countries frothing at the mouth, what makes you think that this didn’t start as “no privacy-invasive cookies?”

          • rmuk@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            If the cookies are nessecary for the site to technically function, you don’t need to be promoted to accept. The law - which doesn’t even mention cookies - allows the absolute minimum amount of data required to provide a service to be gathered. For a website, that included cookies for storing preferences, shopping baskets, login tokens, etc.

            • Magnum, P.I.@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              But it must still inform you and give you the right to not use the service if you don’t want this form of collection happening, its just that you can’t use the service and refuse the bare minimum they need to operate.

      • BeUnique@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        It was pretty crazy taking my phone from the United States to the EU and seeing all of the notifications of how my data is being shared by “free” apps! It just goes to show that the saying “if the product is free, you’re the product” is 100% true!

      • iegod@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Amen. If the endpoint serves up the content I’m looking for our interaction is over. The site doesn’t need a response.

  • kalpol@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 month ago

    I still run umatrix in Firefox snd the level of calling out that even simple pages do is shocking. And likely all those called sites even for fonts are collecting something about you.

  • VinegarChunks@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    I want websites to all have a button that says “yeah you can sell my personal data but the website contractually agrees to give me half”

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah sure, give me whatever cookies aren’t already blocked. I love cookies. Is that all of them?

    (closes LibreWolf, which nukes everything except whitelisted sites)

    …pathetic.

    • lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can’t get it from the store, but it still works as long as you already had it, install using a browser running Chromium V2 before updating, or install it from file, right? Better yet, switch to Firefox (but the most de-Mozilla’d one)

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        No it won’t work. Chromium V3 disables or removes features that it relied upon to work. That’s not to say they might not have found a workaround. But I’m sure it’s harder and doesn’t work as effectively.

        Edit: also Firefox does not use Chromium. So yes switching to Firefox is a viable option. But in no way part of my point.

    • dafta@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      DNS blocking doesn’t work with cookie prompts since they’re from the same domain as the website. You need something like ublock origin which has the feature to block specific DOM components on the website.

  • Gravitywell.xYz@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    My setup is by default all cookies are session cookies unless manually changed.

    Unlock doesn’t really give that as an option but Vivaldi has it built in.