167
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by netvor@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world

This might be just EU thing, but is there an effective way to deal with endless "accept/reject cookies" dialogues?

Regardless of the politics behind, I think we can all agree that current state of practice around these dialogues is ...just awful.

Basically every site seems to use some sort of common middleware to create the actual dialogue and it's rare case when they are actually useful and user friendly


or at least not trying to "get you". At least for me, this leads to being more likely to look for "reject all" or even leave, even if my actual general preference is not that. I've just seen too many of them where clicking anything but "accept all" will lead to some sort of visual punishment.

Moreover, the fact that the dialogues are often once per domain, and by definition per-device and per-browser, they are just .. darn ... everywhere, all the frickin' time.

Question: What strategy have you developed over time to deal with these annoying flies? Just "accept all" muscle memory? Plugins? Using just one site (lemmy.world, obviously) and nothing else? Something better?

Bonus, question (technical take): is there a perspective that this could be dealt on browser technical level? To me it smells like the kind of problem that could be solved in a similar way like language -- ie. via HTTP headers that come from browser preferences.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Navarian@lemm.ee 76 points 1 year ago

The annoyances filters in uBlock Origin take care of these, I believe there are a few filters specifically for this exact issue, named appropriately.

[-] netvor@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

what.. I've had uBlock Origin enabled all the time, just never went to settings.. :-D

[-] Konlanx@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

Where exactly did you find that setting?

[-] Pechente@feddit.de 45 points 1 year ago

Click the uBlock icon > click the gear in the bottom right > click the second tab called "filter lists" > extend "annoyances" category > pick "adguard - cookie notices"

[-] Grimlo9ic@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

What a top-tier tip. I'm one of those people who have uBlock Origin but never knew about this. Thank you!

[-] kaladininskyrim@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Do you know if there is a difference between AdGuard and EasyList lists? or if any of the two are more trustworthy?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Konlanx@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you so much!

[-] guyrocket@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Thanks for this...I just did it...what exactly does it do?

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Do you know how it handles the actual cookies? Does it auto accept/reject or just block the site from making cookies?

[-] nothacking@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 1 year ago

It simply hides them, equivalent to just not doing anything. It would be illegal in the EU if the site tracked users in this case, but U block can also block trackers, so even if they tried it wouldn't work.

[-] count0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

There's CookieAutoDelete (or anonymous tabs, containers, ...) for the other side of this issue.

[-] DevCat@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Yup, I have mine setup to autodelete cookies from tabs I've closed after 15 seconds. I just "accept all" cookies and don't worry about it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mrmanager@lemmy.today 8 points 1 year ago

Had no idea this existed. Thanks!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Is there a way to get it on mobile?

[-] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Firefox has addons on mobile, e.g. uBlock origin.

load more comments (2 replies)

Friendly reminder that consent popups that don't have a clear "reject" option right next to the "accept" button are a violation of GDPR. You can report these to your country's data/privacy governmental body - for example Datatilsynet in Norway/Denmark, CNIL in France. You don't have to do it for every website that you go to, obviously, but if you do it even once you're helping solve this problem for more users than just yourself.

Others have given you some good technical solutions - personally I use the uBlock Origin + annoyance filters enabled approach, and use Firefox on Android to get the same experience there.

[-] jochem@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago

Consent-o-matic on laptop. Usually I'll go through the options and be annoyed. Sometimes I can't be bothered and hit accept all.

[-] Geth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

This is the way. It's developed by some people from a Danish university and it's really trying to navigate the shitty popups and find that decline button. Best add-on I have next to ublock.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] babumenos@lemmy.studio 15 points 1 year ago

You can install uBlock Origin, the imho best ad blocker under the sun, and activate both the “EasyList Annoyances Cookie Notices” and the “AdGuard Annoyances Cookie Notices” lists. https://ublockorigin.com uBlock is available for all the most common platforms Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Opera, and there’s a manual install, too.

[-] sramder@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Consent-o-matic seems to work about 80% of the time. I run the Firefox plugin at home and the Safari extension on my phone.

[-] scarabic@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago
[-] sramder@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I think the desktop version lets you configure more fine grained preferences, but yes it’s designed to deny by default.

[-] CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

noScript with blocking all Scripts by default. Most sites rely on javascript to ask you the cookie question. Of course that will disable all other javascript functionality which i have to enable manually if I need it.

[-] danhab99@programming.dev 17 points 1 year ago

Most sites rely on JavaScript for everything

[-] Jamie@jamie.moe 5 points 1 year ago

You'd be surprised how many sites are still functional enough without JS. Even then, you can often keep a lot of the tracking sites blocked and only whitelist the essentials.

[-] danhab99@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Honestly my opinion comes from my professional experience as a web developer. I only use react and every website I've ever created requires JavaScript.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Yes but I prefer blocking everything unless whitelisted. It is not convenient, i'm used to it though. And since most sites rely on third party sites for consent management I can use the sites java script functions if I want to by whitelisting. Note that I operate that way because of security and privacy concerns and as an act of protest and not to go around consent pop up that's just a nice side effect.

[-] Jamie@jamie.moe 3 points 1 year ago

I pair it with AdNauseum and have my browser "click" on every ad it sees. I don't know if those are being filtered on the other end or not, but I like to think that I'm making the advertisers pay for clicks they aren't really getting and messing with their metrics.

[-] CaptObvious@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

If there were a way to be sure that this is not tied to my identity, I'd be all over wasting their money as much as possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Raphael@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago
[-] frantisek@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I don’t care about cookies extension or ublock origin with Fanboy's Cookie List + Cookie autodelete extension

[-] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago

I recommend "I still don't care about cookies" because that extension didn't sell out.

[-] livedeified@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I've been dabbling with duckduckgo recently. there's a function in the browser settings to allow only what's necessary for the site.

[-] Knusper@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

There is an HTTP Header, called "Do Not Track", but unfortunately, it has been broken.
The idea was that even under legislations that allow assuming users want to be tracked, this header being set by explicit user action would have been clear evidence that this assumption is wrong in this case.

Unfortunately, Google and Facebook refused to comply outright and with their tracking software running on pretty much all webpages, compliance was never an option for all those webpages.

And Microsoft killed it off completely, by setting it per default in Internet Explorer. Might sound like a good thing, but it meant that the header could be there, even if that particular user actually fucking loves being tracked, which meant it was pretty much legally void.

[-] Kissaki@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The dialogues are not primarily about cookie consent but consent handling personal data. With that in mind, my primary concern is not giving that consent unnecessarily. I'm not interested in any personalized tracking when they could do enough usage statistic without consent and without sharing personal data with other parties. (That's why I won't use browser extensions that simply accept everything with the primary purpose of the consent dialogs not showing up.)

Consent-O-Matic is a browser extension that will decline any consent as far as possible.

It doesn't work on every website but that's better than auto-accepting - because I don't want to give consent.

Sometimes, when the barrier is not too high, I use decline all or open choices and save (verifying defaults are off). Depends on what it is though; often times it's not worth it to me to invest just to read their content. (Especially when it's regurgitated from other sources.)

If I can't use a website without consenting to personalized tracking I leave.

Another alternative is using alternate frontends to websites/services or the web archive.

My general view is that any service they could want to provide would be able to be served without consent requests. Ads can be served without personalized tracking (and can still be contextual to content). Visitor and usage tracking/stats can be done in a way without sharing that information to third parties and without individual user tracking. Legitimate interest and handling data to service (according to terms/contract) do not need consent. So really, there is no need for any consent.

/edit: I will be trying out ublock origin's hiding and reading up on Firefox automatic rejection mentioned in other comments. I expect them to behave better than the Consent-O-Matic delay of it going through all settings.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev 4 points 1 year ago

I don't care about cookies

[-] 098qwelkjzxc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Noooo way, they got bought out by Avast

[-] unabatedshagie@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Someone forked the last version from before it was bought. I think it’s called “I still don’t care about cookies”

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] smoregooseboard@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

If I have to click: 'deny' a gazillion times, then I just leave. If they have the alternative: 'deny all', then it's OK.

[-] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

I have a strict 2-click rule. If I'm not able to disagree to all cookies with two clicks I'm leaving the site again

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ultratiem@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I installed Hush (for Apple devices). Totally even forgot about cookie prompts

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
167 points (97.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35868 readers
672 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS