I happened to click a link that took me to the associated twitter X account for something I was interested in and was greeted by not one, not two, but four modern day web popups.

I know it’s nothing new. I’ve got a couple of firefox plugins that are usually quite good at hiding this sort of nonsense, but I guess they failed me today (or, I shudder to think, there were even more that were blocked, and this is what got through)

What’s the worst new/not-signed-in user experience you’ve encountered recently?

  • Spaniard
    link
    English
    -4925 days ago

    Ask cookie question is required.

    Thank the European bureaucrats that don’t understand technology.

    • my_hat_stinks
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5825 days ago

      No, it’s the website’s fault. You only need explicit consent if you’re tracking users beyond what your service obviously requires to function, the problem is these sites are stalking you.

      And if it’s even slightly harder to decline than to accept they’re likely not in compliance anyway so it’s definitely not the EU’s fault.

      • Spaniard
        link
        English
        -22
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        Of course it’s the website fault, but just like government don’t let companies do whatever they want (all the time) the have to force websites to not do certain things, a warning certainly doesn’t do much when people keep clicking “accept”.

        It’s the EU’s fault that there is that warning in the pages(which is what the OP is talking about in how clean websites are) a warning that doesn’t fix the real problem, just puts a sign on it.

        “WET FLOOR!” instead of fixing the leaking pipe.

        • @FooBarrington
          link
          English
          2425 days ago

          It’s not just a warning, it’s also an option to reject.

          • ladfrombrad 🇬🇧
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -125 days ago

            It’s not just a warning, it’s also an option to reject.

            Some don’t give you an option, but actually have a much cleaner interface imo.

            Whether or not it’s better since you still have to click OK, some don’t let you reject them at all.

            • @Nurgus
              link
              English
              1525 days ago

              If they don’t allow you to reject in two clicks then they’re violating the EU regulation.

              • @AA5B
                link
                English
                625 days ago

                I wish I could get my EU representatives to act on those! Oh right, I live on a different continent in a country that lets businesses run amuck

              • ladfrombrad 🇬🇧
                link
                fedilink
                English
                325 days ago

                I’m aware of that, but I’m just pointing out many websites do not give you the consent options as stated above which imo are much more annoying.

                • @Nurgus
                  link
                  English
                  325 days ago

                  Ah, fair enough then.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1525 days ago

              Also, some researchers found out that nearly two thirds of the top 1000 websites don’t even honor your selection. If you say only necessary cookies they ignore it and still track you. Shocker.

              • ladfrombrad 🇬🇧
                link
                fedilink
                English
                425 days ago

                No fuggin doubt.

                And you know what irks me more is when you buy things from places like eBay or other third party seller websites (where you’ve consented to their cookies/terms) your email address you use with them is then in the hands of a goofball who’s had their personal business PC been compromised.

                The few times I use eBay the email addy I use on their sees my inbox flooded. Fucking shitshow.

            • @FooBarrington
              link
              English
              1225 days ago

              If you can’t reject, they either don’t need the pop-up, or they’re not in compliance with the law. Either way it’s in no way the fault of the lawmakers.

    • graff
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2925 days ago

      Sure, but can we at least agree that 800 “partners” is a tad too much?

      • Spaniard
        link
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        Of course, the problem is they shouldn’t have gone for a warning, they should have gone against the practice of having 800 partners, or do we think the average user clicks “refuse”?

        What they did is almost like nothing with extra steps.