@brandon they still use analytics, just without cookies.

@brandon I dunno, it seems like a pretty headline to get good press for complying with a stupid law and not actually changing their behavior in meaningful ways

@sir @brandon If you comply in this manner actually the law isn't stupid. Otherwise it is.

@clacke @sir @brandon the law doesn't say you have to use a banner. It's a stupid misinterpretation of the law.

There is literally no nothing that talks about cookies. What they talk about is use of personally identifiable information (tracking cookies is one of those things).

The banner itself also is a not enough to get you out of abusing personally identifiable information. The site also should not track you by default (the banner should make it as easy to opt out as it is to opt in).

Based on their post, it seems as though Github is in compliance. Their previous banner was either unnecessary or not enough, depending on what their previous behaviour was.

Now all the of t his assumes the law is actually being enforced, which we haven't seen much of yet. There are some cases slowly making their way through the system, but I don't think expect to see anything in a while. The fact that nothing has happened yet is why people think that the cookie banner is enough to keep the theory illegal activities legit.

Follow

@loke @clacke @sir @brandon

It is “planned” to ban the bad patterns which I partly described in conf.tube/videos/watch/4102f53

Asked many question in details to EU Commission regarding

· · Web · 0 · 0 · 1
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!