1478
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?
The different popups just show how bad design the web is today.
Ask cookie question is required.
Login? Always create an account and proceed with all signup questions.
Agreement? Read them 1 hour until you have understood everything.
Webbrowser: can I get your location? And please the mic and video too!
Finally, don't forget the ads!
I one time for fun (cause I'm insane) read the entire Windows license agreement, MSA (Microsoft Services Agreement), and privacy policy. It took me 1 hour and 45 minutes, I timed it.
I could imagine they'd be interested in you over here: Tosdr.org
Back on my Xbox 360 I decided to scroll through the agreement just to see how long it would take. I didn't read it: I just held down the stick to see how long it would take.
I gave up after 40 minutes of scrolling.
That must be some slow scrolling
Thank you for your sacrifice
Wow. Is it even legal to have it that long?
I bet a lot was of details were missing in there as well.
Thank the European bureaucrats that don't understand technology.
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.
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.
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.
If they don't allow you to reject in two clicks then they're violating the EU regulation.
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
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.
Ah, fair enough then.
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.
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.
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.
Sure, but can we at least agree that 800 "partners" is a tad too much?
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.