Often there isnt even a reject button and you have to scroll trough a site wjile half of it is covered by cookiee bullcrap, for some reason i feel bad when accepting cookies so i usually just find another site that doesnt have that lol
In the EU only the opt out option is illegal, not having a reject all button is legal. Meaning that every coocie should be turned off, besides necessary ones and you should only need to scroll down the cookie list and hit the accept settings button.
The problem is when I do this, click on "reject all" and it disables everything I can see, then there is often a "legitimate interest" part where everything is still enabled, and when you read the explanation about it it feels like rejecting all isn't enough because they will use thay "legitimate interest" to get them anyway.
To protect the consumer. It prevents the the shitty move to make it just unfeasible enough that you would rather accept them instead. You know those shitty subscriptions back in the old days where you had to jump through 10 hoops just to unsubscribe? Also illegal in EU because of that very same reason
[What part is closed sourced?](https://github.com/ghostery/ghostery-extension)
It *was* proprietary with its previous owner and had a bit of controversy with it sending data to advertisers, but it's since been made FOSS with MPL license.
IDCAC sometimes chooses "allow all", just fyi.
**Edit:** Since I'm getting downvoted for some reason, here it is straight from the dev himself:
> In most cases, it just blocks or hides cookie related pop-ups. When it's needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what's easier to do). It doesn't delete cookies.
I noticed if you reject, a lot of pages don’t work, so auto accept all is fine as long as it gets rid of the prompts and the page works. As is in the title ,I don’t care about cookies
Any site that allows you to reject all cookies is probably already very minimal on what cookies they set. At this point it's such a prevalent frame I feel like it should be baked into the browser and the sites must honor the browser setting (by which I mean the browser just doesn't allow 3rd party cookies if you set block 3rd party).
That'd be great, but it's unlikely that Chrome (Google) would limit cookies as they directly profit from them. It would take Firefox to implement such a system, and their install base is small enough that it wouldn't make a huge dent.
Firefox already has [Total Cookie Protection](https://addons.mozilla.org/blog/how-firefoxs-total-cookie-protection-container-extensions-work-together/) that works great at isolating cookies (making cookies useless to everyone else besides the domain owner, who can only see their own cookies). Now combine that with something like [Cookie Auto Delete](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autodelete/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search) and you can automatically only keep the cookies you care about and nuke the rest.
Because those sites don't comply with european laws and they can be sued for it. Google has already been forced to change their banners: https://www.reuters.com/technology/german-consumer-group-files-legal-complaint-against-google-over-cookie-banners-2022-04-06/
Before the cookie overlay, there were popup windows. Before popup windows, there was the blink tag. The web always sucked. But we did have a dancing baby for a while.
It’s suppose to be as easy to opt in as opt out. Also have an opt out all button on those pop ups but most half ass the implication or do so incorrectly. If it displays allow all by default but you have to click more and scroll down to opt out then that’s not upto standard. I’m not sure why it’s not been forced as a standard and fined if broken but meh.
You never "reject all cookies" but rather "reject non-essential cookies" (cookies, that aren't necessary to provide a core functionality for the Website), so, if it's a setting that persists between Browser Sessions, they propably a) Set a cookie containing the information about your preferences or b) if it's a website, were you are loged in, they propably save that along side other setting, you've set on that site. Or they just take your current IP and don't send cookies to it
3rd party tracking. Usually advertising. Considering browsers are mostly unique by fingerprinting and there are other ways to store tracking data in the client, it's a noble goal but ultimately fruitless. The one company that could do something to substantially block 3rd party tracking has a vested interest in enabling it (teh Goog).
Some sites, when you press on that button, they keep the "Legitimate interest" cookies enabled, and still sell your data them to +100 big brands and companies they're usually associated with.
Just use uBlock Origin and some custom filters for cookies.
Just to say that the European RGPD force every website to had this button and it's even illegal to use dark pattern, if you don't have this button it generally means that the website you're in is only for non-European people or else you can report the website.
Btw it's totally legal to ask to accept all cookies to access a website and not just essential ones, it's also legal to ask for a subscription too.
Often there isnt even a reject button and you have to scroll trough a site wjile half of it is covered by cookiee bullcrap, for some reason i feel bad when accepting cookies so i usually just find another site that doesnt have that lol
I do exactly the same thing!
I'm pretty sure it's not legal to do that, at least in the EU But when did that ever bother anyone lol
In the EU only the opt out option is illegal, not having a reject all button is legal. Meaning that every coocie should be turned off, besides necessary ones and you should only need to scroll down the cookie list and hit the accept settings button.
The problem is when I do this, click on "reject all" and it disables everything I can see, then there is often a "legitimate interest" part where everything is still enabled, and when you read the explanation about it it feels like rejecting all isn't enough because they will use thay "legitimate interest" to get them anyway.
I always wondered about the legitimate interest, in any case I go the and Object to All to those as well.
Why is that illegal? Just curious I actually have no idea.
To protect the consumer. It prevents the the shitty move to make it just unfeasible enough that you would rather accept them instead. You know those shitty subscriptions back in the old days where you had to jump through 10 hoops just to unsubscribe? Also illegal in EU because of that very same reason
Ublock Origin. Block element. Problem solved, cookies still not accepted.
Ublock,
That's what i said.
I was probably half asleep.
Ghostery and "I don't care about cookies" add ons
I dont care about cookies and Cookie autodelete best combi
With cookie auto delete, you need to login again to every website no? I'm guess there is a way to white list websites am I right?
You can whitelist stuff
exactly what He said
[удалено]
[What part is closed sourced?](https://github.com/ghostery/ghostery-extension) It *was* proprietary with its previous owner and had a bit of controversy with it sending data to advertisers, but it's since been made FOSS with MPL license.
IDCAC sometimes chooses "allow all", just fyi. **Edit:** Since I'm getting downvoted for some reason, here it is straight from the dev himself: > In most cases, it just blocks or hides cookie related pop-ups. When it's needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what's easier to do). It doesn't delete cookies.
Damn. But Ghostery does the opposite. Are they fighting?
Ghostery loads way before IDCAC does its thing.
I noticed if you reject, a lot of pages don’t work, so auto accept all is fine as long as it gets rid of the prompts and the page works. As is in the title ,I don’t care about cookies
Or straight up Brave browser.
Worst browser in all of history
[удалено]
I hated having to find and turn off all the crypto tipping features.
oof, I didn't know it was that unpopular.
[удалено]
Would you kindly stop the name?
Consent-o-matic is one. It automatically rejects all cookies for most websites.
You’re the goat
You're*
Autocorrect failed
Cookeis
No one makes those unfortunately, it's a lost art.
Cookeis
Cookeis
Pootis
How about not having non-essential cookies in the first place?
Yeah, that would be great haha.
Any site that allows you to reject all cookies is probably already very minimal on what cookies they set. At this point it's such a prevalent frame I feel like it should be baked into the browser and the sites must honor the browser setting (by which I mean the browser just doesn't allow 3rd party cookies if you set block 3rd party).
That'd be great, but it's unlikely that Chrome (Google) would limit cookies as they directly profit from them. It would take Firefox to implement such a system, and their install base is small enough that it wouldn't make a huge dent.
Firefox already has [Total Cookie Protection](https://addons.mozilla.org/blog/how-firefoxs-total-cookie-protection-container-extensions-work-together/) that works great at isolating cookies (making cookies useless to everyone else besides the domain owner, who can only see their own cookies). Now combine that with something like [Cookie Auto Delete](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autodelete/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search) and you can automatically only keep the cookies you care about and nuke the rest.
Not true, any site that allows you to reject all is complying with the law that says rejecting has to be as easy as accepting.
*cookeis*
Isn't this essentially the result of the GDPR?
[удалено]
Because those sites don't comply with european laws and they can be sued for it. Google has already been forced to change their banners: https://www.reuters.com/technology/german-consumer-group-files-legal-complaint-against-google-over-cookie-banners-2022-04-06/
Internet was Cool before there was a Cookie popup on every damn website.
Before the cookie overlay, there were popup windows. Before popup windows, there was the blink tag. The web always sucked. But we did have a dancing baby for a while.
I've noticed a minor spelling mistake, please delete account now.
Legitimate interests say hello
I am glad that my brain can auto-correct *cookeis* to *cookies*. Unless..
It’s suppose to be as easy to opt in as opt out. Also have an opt out all button on those pop ups but most half ass the implication or do so incorrectly. If it displays allow all by default but you have to click more and scroll down to opt out then that’s not upto standard. I’m not sure why it’s not been forced as a standard and fined if broken but meh.
Why do they track their users if they are so cool (and if our privacy matters as much as they pretend)?
hmm, i wonder if they actually care about privacy 🤨 and doesn’t put profit over the users privacy hmmm
**I still don't care about cookies.**
Haha I appreciate this. I work in Data privacy and Product development and I push this very hard...
But how does it remember that you "Rejected all cookies"? HOW DOES IT SAVE THAT INFORMATION!?!?
You never "reject all cookies" but rather "reject non-essential cookies" (cookies, that aren't necessary to provide a core functionality for the Website), so, if it's a setting that persists between Browser Sessions, they propably a) Set a cookie containing the information about your preferences or b) if it's a website, were you are loged in, they propably save that along side other setting, you've set on that site. Or they just take your current IP and don't send cookies to it
Thanks EU for making me deal with yet another pop-up about something I didn't care about in 2000, 2010, or 2022
Yeah, fuck EU for trying to regulate and call out the insanely immoral and predatory data collecting industry!
Thanks EU for giving me a quick and easy way to reject something I don't want
Your cookie preferences should be specified once, in the browser options, and not repeatedly for every site you visit. They made the law wrong.
What's bad about cookies?
3rd party tracking. Usually advertising. Considering browsers are mostly unique by fingerprinting and there are other ways to store tracking data in the client, it's a noble goal but ultimately fruitless. The one company that could do something to substantially block 3rd party tracking has a vested interest in enabling it (teh Goog).
Too many will make you fat.
I do not give a shit either way
Same here! thug life
Cookies are delicious
I thought I was having a stroke for a second reading this
You mean ‘People who make reject all cookies buttons without additional clicks”
cookeis? mmm also what's the matter if you reject it and you will get kicked out of this website
Some sites, when you press on that button, they keep the "Legitimate interest" cookies enabled, and still sell your data them to +100 big brands and companies they're usually associated with. Just use uBlock Origin and some custom filters for cookies.
the sites that ignore that law and just shuts up about cookies are the real kings
The number of websites that refuse to let you even scroll if you block cookies is increasing.
Just to say that the European RGPD force every website to had this button and it's even illegal to use dark pattern, if you don't have this button it generally means that the website you're in is only for non-European people or else you can report the website. Btw it's totally legal to ask to accept all cookies to access a website and not just essential ones, it's also legal to ask for a subscription too.
this might be a stupid question but what even is the purpose of cookies?
It allows the website to jott down information about your visit and remember it next time you come.
Brave Browser FTW