News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by tbihl on Sunday September 12, 2021 @09:38AM (#28501033)
Please stop doing this. Not everything you don't like needs to be illegal, and taking your business elsewhere has literally never been easier in the history of the world.

I don't want to live in a world where the criminalization of everything that ever happened that you didn't like means that I'm always breaking the law.

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by nkingsy on Sunday September 12, 2021 @10:03AM (#28501239)
If hn is not the place to discuss web regulation, I don’t know what is. New things pose new and unexpected harms and nuisances. Regulation is the cure.

On the flip side, this particular dark pattern was caused by regulation. As usual, shades of gray

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by xondono on Sunday September 12, 2021 @03:25PM (#28504047)
> Regulation is the cure

Regulation is a possible cure.

Call me crazy, but if some place would be weary of going straight up for the “let’s ban things with lawyers ” approach, I would think is HN.

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by Nextgrid on Sunday September 12, 2021 @09:46AM (#28501092)
The problem with spyware is that it stalks you regardless of whether you give “business” to the site or not.
Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by sellyme on Sunday September 12, 2021 @09:29PM (#28506892)
> I don't want to live in a world where the criminalization of everything that ever happened that you didn't like means that I'm always breaking the law.

You'll be fine as long as you're not in the habit of doing things like this that are clearly outwardly hostile to everyone you come into contact with.

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by junon on Sunday September 12, 2021 @10:45AM (#28501605)
You're right, why even have consumer protection laws amirite?
Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by A_non_e-moose on Sunday September 12, 2021 @09:56AM (#28501176)
How many people not liking murder or theft did it take to make it into a law?

How many people not liking gaslighting personal-data-theft dark patterns will it take to make it into a law?

We're transitioning from purely physical beings to having a more virtual presence. Virtual crimes are much less visible and have much greater impact at scale than their physical counterparts, identity theft by Equifax breach or a hack, VS physical force or pickpocketing, for example.

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by hcykb on Sunday September 12, 2021 @11:00AM (#28501763)
You are equating a website setting a cookie in your device (which you could disable in your browser settings, btw) with theft and murder.
Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by csydas on Sunday September 12, 2021 @11:18AM (#28501928)
No, they are equation that previously both items were socially acceptable until society demanded change and made both illegal and provided services to enforce such laws.

The impact of violating privacy is neither increased nor decreased by the impact of theft and/or murder. If we compare theft and murder, theft «in general» is less impactful than murder, as I'm deprived of property and potentially physically injured with theft, with murder I am deprived of life itself.

That murder is generally more impactful doesn't make theft more acceptable/less bad; we should have laws for both.

Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by scrollaway on Sunday September 12, 2021 @11:03AM (#28501795)
"Cookie banners" are a misnomer. GDPR rules apply to all persistent personal identifiers, not just cookies. (And likewise, they do not apply to cookies which are not personal identifiers or are critical for site functionality)
Re:Starbucks and TrustArc add fake cookie processing delay i... by Grakel on Sunday September 12, 2021 @12:08PM (#28502365)
Normally I would agree with you but if there's anything that we can all agree to ban it's annoying, unnecessary practices like this.