Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • it's funny sometimes there will be an archived espn.com (like this https://proxy.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/030418) and it's hard to argue the web was not better like this, i.e. readable
    by fantasizr
  • > You obviously know what cookies are. If we don't put this here, delighted lawyers from EU and CA will sue us. Not only this is very expensive, there are no browser settings to remove this, since every site does this differently. You voted for this! Also you have to click "I agree"

    That's just echoing corporate arguments an not good satire.

    by account42
  • Needs to autoplay a video which when dismissed just moves to another window and continues playing. With sound.
    by andy99
  • And you can’t dismiss it because the X is somehow hidden behind another popup
    by tamimio
  • and hijack your clipboard and back button
    by six_seven
  • So many websites do popups and it feels so anti-user. Maybe I get unusually annoyed, but I do not need a Gemini popup ad in Google Docs. Just let me do what I came to the website to do!
    by cg5280
  • But you could obviously be doing it faster/smarter by using Gemini /s
    by dylan604
  • That "In case you're not aware, there's COVID-19 happening" banner isn't nearly tall nor yellow enough. Given a 6-inch-tall screen, the proper layout would be:

      +-----------------+
  |2" of vestigial  |
  |COVID messaging  |
  +-----------------+
  |1.5" of actual   |
  | content         |
  +-----------------+
  |2.5 of EU        |
  |  cookie banner  |
  +-----------------+
    A local utility took it even further during COVID:

      +---------------------+
  |2" of COVID messaging|
  +---------------------+
  |1" of undismissable  |
  | "our app is gone;   |
  | use the mobile site |
  | that you're on now" |
  +---------------------+
  |0.5" of content      |
  +---------------------+
  |2.5" of EU cookie    |
  | banner, despite     |
  | being a US-only corp|
  +---------------------+
    by RattlesnakeJake
  • It also needs to scroll in after a second or two, and shift the page content down, so you mis-click the wrong link, and end up loading something that takes forever to load and somehow manages to cause the back button to misbehave.
    by jasonjayr
  • The cookie thing, I assume it's EU-only, is an example of the EU policy making process being fundamentally broken in some way. If you create a flawed policy and don't fix it many years after it's very visibly obvious that it's a bad policy, something is really wrong.
    by RivieraKid
  • WARNING: Reading his post can expose you to photons, which are known to the State of California to cause cancer. For more information go to www.P65Warnings.ca.gov
    by buildsjets
  • Policy making assumed good faith actors - specifically that tracking outside of necessary for website to function to be minimal. Because like…not necessary.

    It’s only broken to the extent that it collided with a messed up world where websites track even when they don’t need to and then send that to 2000 partners for more profit extraction on top of what the website does commercially.

    Something is deeply fucked up there and it’s not the EU part. They just make a good scapegoat because the banner is what users see

    by Havoc
  • Do Not Track was the right implementation (browser-based, activate only once) and it was sabotaged by ad peddlers. It is bad policy that has been reached after every better alternative was rejected.
    by logseman
  • Most US sites are giving the cookie bag to US users. It may simply be easier for leadership to say add the widget than it is to say we won’t accept traffic from the EU or risk the consequences

    It feels similar to how CA environmental regs become the national standard simply because the market is so large it’s not worth splitting on it. So they just slap a cancer warning on everything

    by mingus88
  • Actually cookies are not mandated by the EU, but this was the solution the big companies agreed on and now Google and Co try to lobby against better solutions.

    Check out: https://killthecookiebanner.eu/

    by mnewme
  • I see a lot of people below arguing that this isn’t the fault of the EU policy but the companies. I think that’s being overly charitable to the policy. While you can be rightly upset with the companies behavior, ultimately policy has to work with the incentives it creates. The policy in its current form allows for meeting requirements with annoying cookie banner opt-outs while keeping the lucrative business of tracking. If we don’t want that, the policy should be changed. Don’t expect companies to go against their interests here, even if some will actually be thoughtful and find a way to do so. The “Purpose Of a System Is What It Does” principle applies, and the purpose of the EU policy seems to be cookie banners for most sites.
    by mmillin
  • The EU said "you have to ask for permission before forcefully sodomizing your users", and webdevs thought "let's ask for permission" rather than "let's not forcefully sodomize our users". Of course, the law could have said "don't forcefully sodomize users", but it seems the west is still under the impression that some people will do the right thing, just because, sometimes. (maybe 20 years ago they would have, just because, sometimes, but they won't now)
    by zetanor
  • it's an example of malicious compliance by some, and herd mentality by others.

    I had a discussion with my CFO about removing the cookie banner from our website (because we don't set any tracking cookies, and cookies for things like login are exempted) and he said "yeah, but it makes the site seem less legitimate.

    by dijit
  • Some graybeard advice - Any time you need to use a website that doesn't require active cognitive interaction - click the button in your browser that enables Reader View to get the content and strip out everything else. It's not perfect, but it makes the web more usable (especially on mobile, my goodness it's gotten bad).

    Firefox also has an extension called "Auto Reader View" in which you can set sites to automatically change to that mode.

    by VCFundedGenYer
  • Needs a Google login popup, required for any site that there is no reason at all to have an account with.
    by kwertyoowiyop
  • Notifications?

    How about an email popup. My browser will happily auto-populate it.

    by JKCalhoun
  • Or even better, something that pretends to be a real "Sign in with Google" button but instead phishes your username and password.
    by Dwedit
  • It also needs to ask the browser for your location and to send you notifications.
    by malfist
  • It should appear a second after the page seems to have finished loading, so that it hijacks the input if the user is navigating with the keyboard or typing something into a form.
    by robertjwebb
  • I'm filing a bug report...

    Steps to reproduce: Open terminal emulator and type;

    $ w3m https://lxe.github.io/everywebsite/

    I can read the same content as I can read in Firefox.

    What I expected to happen: See content similar to the following;

    Update your browser Your browser isn't supported any more. To continue your search, upgrade to a recent version. Learn more

    by 2b3a51
  • You must upgrade to IE5 to continue.
    by bigbuppo
  • Loaded way too fast and is way too responsive.

    Also when I checked NoScript, it's only loading js from lxe.github.io

    I expect there to be at minimum 8 domains, but often 12-18.

    by WarmWash
  • 10 of them should be cloudfront domains that change every day.
    by inigyou
  • And the legitimate mass spying with multi thousand other organizations, of course.
    by psychoslave
  • Also it shows something when you open it without enabling its JavaScript instead of a normal website which won't show anything without JS... even if the page only has to show text (HTML? I hardly know her).
    by tmtvl