Post #4010599
2026-07-22 11:09 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@noybeu@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 11:14
โ Together with @beuc@eupolicy.social , @checkmyads , Civil Liberties Union for Europe, @edri@eupolicy.social , @eff@mastodon.social , Irish Council for Civil Liberties, Stichting Data Bescherming Nederland, @apti@mastodon.online , @HomoDigitalisGR@mastodon.social , Digihumanism - Centre for AI & Digital Humanism, and Sustainable Computing Lab, noyb has therefore joined a campaign to make this happen โ and #KillTheCookieBanner!
-
@Jc00qe@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 13:21
@noybeu@mastodon.social I think the real solution is to outlaw data-brokers. remove the incentive structure and thats it
-
@streetcoder@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 11:55
@noybeu@mastodon.social I don't agree. First it's not about cookies but all PII the software is processing, e.g. in localStorage, every IP in Third Party Requests and even in the websites own Requests if not strictly necessary and obvious why. You have to inform for each Purpose and Service in the moment of processing and ask for permission. The Solution could only work if we have a human countable list of DPS/Purposes in the browser, but on websites could still be different ones. Banner still needed.
-
@Marija_@mastodon.social 2026-07-22 13:01
@noybeu@mastodon.social Browser-level preferences would be a huge improvement.
-
@electropict@mastodon.scot 2026-07-26 11:13
@noybeu@mastodon.social It's not clear what this could really mean. Will there be a register of cookie purposes that domain owners can sign up with, so that every possible use of cookies can be identified so UAs could possibly give users the option to choose? Seems unlikely. Or is it just some very broad generalisations such as currently found in many intrusive cookie banners - essential, optional, none; which is of limited use. ...