Slashdot Mirror
Changes Are Coming To the EU's Cookie Directive, But It's Not Going Away (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The European Commission is listening to suggestions regarding EU laws on privacy and electronic communications (e-Privacy), among which is also the EU Cookie Directive that has made the lives of EU Internet users a living hell. The EU Commission has started an open consultation on this topic and is inviting users and businesses to provide their opinion. From the consultation's text, which is nothing more than a survey, one could argue that the EU isn't intent on removing the directive at all, but only making small adjustments. In its current implementation, most companies ask users if they're OK with storing cookies on their PCs and then collecting their data. One of the questions the Commission asked and is currently looking for an answer is whether companies should be allowed to deny users access to a website if they don't want to accept using cookies. The EU wants Internet companies to build alternative (usable) websites for people that don't want to use cookies at all, and so respect their decision for privacy.
Rather than say "We use cookies, whether you like it or not, now kick yes" why not give the choice to accept cookies or not ( I don't like popups that force a yes, if been trained to say no over time and think a forced choices equates to untrustworthy actors). While we're at it if you could choose to not get search results back that forward via cloudflare that would also improve my life.
is the sole reason why I'm voting for the UK to leave the EU!
(Just joking, probably...)
So the EU want to force companies to serve customers regardless? Fuck that. Fuck that big time. If a customer doesn't want to meet the criteria for using the website, then the website should be perfectly within its rights to refuse service.
If the EU do move in this direction, then I will be voting to leave. Fuck that.
Waiting for my cheque to implement an entire alternate back-end in 3.. 2.. 1..
Shh.
No, if you don't want to accept the terms of using the website (cookies in this case) you DON'T GET TO USE IT.
WTF is wrong with these people?
made the lives of EU Internet users a living hell
If "living hell" is equivalent to "those things my peripheral vision filters out for me", then c'mon baby! give more of those seven capital sins!! fuck that, make the nine!!
Without cookies being sent back to the server, the server doesn't know what you were doing a moment ago. The design does not maintain the state of the system between transactions. There are other ways of doing this, but this is how http was designed. Yes, cookies are being used to track things that are not involved in the state of the transaction. But, it is hard to eliminate something that is key to the way that http works.
None of this is going to make sense as long as the laws continue to be so completely disconnected from the reality. If a user wants or doesn't want to use cookies, then they have already instructed their browser to take the appropriate action, and it will be perfect in a way that the laws cannot even begin to approach.
Anything the governments do related to this, is irrelevant and wasted. The absolute best case that anyone can hope for, is that they'll do no harm. And that, realistically, will never be achieved.
I have not noticed anything more than "mildly annoying". Hyperbole much?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
the EU Cookie Directive that has made the lives of EU Internet users a living hell
Hyperbole much?
being put in a cattle truck for a days without food, packed so tight you can't lie down or even sit, to a place where you're worked literally to death - is a living hell.
Not foolish cookie legislation.
See subject: It's all sociopaths understand with force when someone upsets their 1/2 truth based agendas & they can't validly overcome their arguments.
* It's ALL a huge "put up job" on forums OR other social media for the purposes of shaping YOUR perceptions to "sell, sell, sell" YOU shit you DO NOT NEED so they get rich & you get poorer (as they have the best sitting in a patent safe selling you bs inferior carrots in the meantime draining you & keeping YOU, the stupid mules they think you are by herding you like animals using sociological/psychological marketing tactics (most dangerous sciences there are that work on the weak-minded seeking 'acceptance' since their lives are unfulfilling on their own merit to be "part of the 'winning' team" that's really, losing - badly)).
Frame the discussion, CONTROL the narrative, shape reality (reality = perception) AND CONTROL PERCEPTION - so if you drink this beer, you will have ALL these women, cars, clothes etc. (when the truth it, it takes all of that from you, removing the possibility of YOU ever attaining it, slowly & PAINFULLY).
Pessimistic? Maybe - Reality?? Oh, for sure.
APK
P.S.=> Once you understand that? You're FREE & have had your eyes opened (& it's really always been thus, but there have been exceptions (French, Russian, US revolutions for example))...
Your 'freedom' comes with a price - you're no longer ignorant & 'happy' (kept stupid watching the WWF etc. vs. educating yourself vs. that crap) so you live like shit as a wageslave making the rich criminal puppet masters playing you on more levels than online, richer & more powerful - creating a mindset you become literally 'hooked on' thinking "that's the way it must be, I'll go along to get along" & online? That's keeping you a slave in the chains of javascript, cookies, dns requestlogs, trackers etc. - et al)... apk
Your browser uses cookies. You have the power to disable cookies in your browser settings. This website may only request that a cookie be stored, it can not force your browser to store the cookie or return the cookie at a later time. This website can not stop your browser from sending it cookies. Only your web browser can disable or delete cookies. You are even sending this website global session cookies that you or some other website asked to be stored, and there is no possible way for the operators of this website to stop you from doing so. By sending cookies to this website you consent to sending cookies to this website.
Only you can prevent cookies, and you have always had the power to do so. The EU legislators are morons, and it is impossible for this website to actually comply with their insane demands.
Laws should request the result, not the method of getting there.
Cookies have many important uses; most of them perfectly legitimate with no privacy ramifications. It is only abuse of cookies that pose a risk, and what might be regulated should be the potential result of motivations for abuse, not the means.
They should repeal the cookie directive and replace it with a "Privacy Directive", regarding retaining and linking personally identifiable information to web history gathered from 3rd party websites And only linking, making record of an association, or inferring personal information gathered by the same website when the information is requested and submitted through an interactive form, and all information that will be linked when information was provided is conspiciously disclosed.
I've never understood the problem with cookies. Websites don't control cookies, the Web-browser does.
The browser should only maintain cookies associated with the browsing window for as long as that window is open. There's no use in anything else. No timers of any sort, short or long, it gets ignored.
Now scripting, that's another kettle of fish altogether.
This is the central disconnect with most politicians. They simply don't realize that doing things in business costs money, and you can't just get more of it from somewhere.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
I think the intent of the EU was to make users aware that their activities were being tracked, unfortunately they focused on an implementation detail of how that could occur. Really they should be telling users precisely how they are being tracked, data retention and why.
Now what starts with the letter C?
Cookie starts with C
Let's think of other things
That starts with C
Oh, who cares about the other things?
C is for cookie, that's good enough for me
C is for cookie, that's good enough for me
C is for cookie, that's good enough for me
Oh, cookie, cookie, cookie starts with C!
Just get rid of the darn things already. Nobody checks if any of these websites conform with the directive anyway.
It didn't inform me that the site uses cookies, but I checked, and there are 2.
Standard JSESSIONID and one that stores the value of whether the user has JS or not.
As an aside, the consultation is the least accessible piece of lawyer speak I have seen in a long time.
If you actually read the law, you would notice it's much more abstract as they do not even mention cookies. It is exactly as you described.
Furthermore storing data for functional purposes is totally fine on the condition that it's removed at the end of the session. If you go for permanent storage or you want to track your user then you need to ask permission. It doesn't matter if you want to achieve that through cookies, images, flash, localstorage.
What part of "Do not track" don't they understand? And for websites that don't honor that, there's always the preference to not accept cookies or to delete them when the session ends. Luckily filtering idiotic cookie warnings is also a browser preference: prebake
Cookies have many important uses; most of them perfectly legitimate with no privacy ramifications.
care to offer any proof for this asertion?
my experience - and likely that of EVERYONE ELSE - is that most cookes ARE there for tracking. did you ever look at them? ever see the 3rd party sites that store shit on your browser?
webmasters are out of control. they essentially report to the marketing dept, these days (unofficially, but the marketing guys run the show, which is why the web is in the ruined state it is, now).
pops, mouse-overs, model dialogs, all kinds of evil shit by these assholes and their minions. if I go to a popular website (which I rarely do) and see the adblock or noscript list of 'do you want to ok any of these?' the list is huge! more crap than content! this is what we now have. a web full of bullshit and junk for the 'regular people' and only the edge sites that are not mainstream can be viewed by those who have locked down their browsers and don't let them run rogue code from any old website.
so often, I'll go to a site, see a blank page, know that I was just saved a whole shitload of crap being thrown at me, I control-w it and move on to something else. fuck them and their javascript and cookie crap.
the web has, for the most part, turned as bad as television. both are sickening to view, when it comes to the mainstream sites.
again, its all the marketing and advertising pukes that have ruined a good thing. its always the case with those assholes, too. they can't leave good things alone.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Meanwhile, the Muslim hordes overrun your lands and defile your women. At least you don't have to worry about cookies tracking what you buy on the Internet.
I finally moved to the EU. I used to laugh at this back when it was first proposed but wholly crap is this annoying. There's almost no website I can visit which doesn't produce some boilerplate warning saying that for the site to work you need cookies. Worst part is it typically loads after the content, so if your computer if slow enough then you're already trying to click a hyperlink when the popup appears and the entire page moves and you click on the wrong link.
See subject: Poland is who you can thank if you're of European descent (which I am proud of) as "the defender of Christianity" (which in the end due to "absolute power corrupting absolutely" went a bad too like all groups do...)
It is just another power structure in the end too, it has its good people but it also has a LOT of bad doing "indulgences" & washing out heroin money for the Italian mafia in Vatican city itself... & imo? The groups play us all by letting us play ourselves by using our sensibilities against us.
Jesus, Buddha, even Barney the dinosaur ARE RIGHT, but the world intentionally keeps you from that keeping you down while 'certain 1% others' play us all like morons (which we are until we wake up).
This goes for ANY organized religion OR fraternal organization of men... JFK God rest his soul & God Bless Him, along with Eisenhower, warned of another... look @ the results for the former (power of the elite class himself albeit @ the expense of a crook father to get there who tried helping those in need, who needed it most to elevate them to a better state to make them feel good about themselves to not have to practice crime, who turned on "the powers that be")
Which is WHY I wouldn't join the masons, being offered to join 3x in my life but who @ least somewhat 'telegraph' their plays beforehand!
However - others, in certain religious groups, DO NOT & say "if you see anyone telling our secrets KILL THEM, they're soulless animals anyway" pretty much, OR will either cut your head off if you don't accept them OR their relatives who think you're all fucking cattle to be made slaves of, animals (funniest part is they ALL believe their own bullshit like "they are the ONLY ones w/ the God given right to rule all - more like Satan given right via the "holy dollar" & gold, the root of all evils).
* You overestimate them - they'll recruit the stupid or ignorant or disgruntled only to use them as expendable assets soldiery - & if/when FORCE by number fails as it did in my example of Poland above? Next they try for infiltration, the province of the weasel!
(Their opponents also feed you a line of bullshit like "You be a good little fool + thou shalt not kill, steal, nor covet thy neighbor's wife" while THEY do it, every single day to maintain control via fear etc.)
Fraternal organizations galore out there too, pyramidical structures that are doing the same shit no matter where you look - using us all like fools who dance to "his masters voice"... you (myself too in my time) submit voluntarily. If you're looking for someone to blame? Look in a mirror for buying into the 'powers that be' bullshit lousy bill of goods intended only (mostly) to better their lives @ the expense of yours in a world of limited resources. Rather than balance it, they use gang up tactics (see the film "Brotherhood of the Bell" to get my point).
APK
P.S.=> Man, they're ALL the same, just different faces - abres los ojos... & all I can say is, IF you're "so good @ being masters of the planet, why the hell are the results so F'd up for then?" - that's all they say to YOU, now don't they? "Your job performance is down lately & if you value your job, you do as I say fucker" etc./et al (even if it means robbing & stealing from your own people)... apk
See subject: Speak for yourself! "Troll hypocrisy" fails - you're off topic. I replied to a poster's question, you're trolling.
APK
P.S.=> ... & failing - it's just "what you do/how you roll" in unidentifiable no-balls worms like yourself (& you know it, I certainly do)... apk
Cookies are not the problem. There are many add-ons out there to gain control over the cookie jar, and using one of them is more or less the end of user tracking. Problem solved.
The directive completely fails to address the intrusive and obnoxious OTHER methods to track users, sometimes even across devices (ultrasound from TV to mobile, anyone?). Flash cookies are probably covered by the directive, but inserting headers, identification by enumerating the installed add-ons and fonts and so forth are fair game. Doing something about these methods is much more difficult, and now behavioral identification is imminent.
The EU should make a directive that limits the tracking as such, not a specific mechanism.
care to offer any proof for this asertion?
For starters..... Cookies are why I can navigate to http://slashdot.org/ every evening and post a comment without having to go through the repetitive task of typing in Yet another username and password every day.
Cookies are why I can go to Youtube and watch a video..... the first time I see one, there will be an Ad shown..... Then I can go back and visit Youtube.com a few minutes later, find a new video, and they will give me a break because i've just seen an Ad ---- they won't force me to sit through another 2 minute pre-roll Advert again for at least a while, because Cookies told them they already made me watch that crap on their website.
Those are just two uses of cookies that benefit me greatly and aren't a privacy issue.
This!
If a user wants or doesn't want to use cookies, then they have already instructed their browser to take the appropriate action
That is true for people here but you should talk to some users sometimes...
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
So, rather than denying access for those who don't wish to be tracked, can a company simply make its content pay-walled by default, but rather than paying $2 per month or something allow the users to accept tracking instead?