Cookie law. Good intentions, bad implementation

Cookie law requires websites to place a confirmation notice if the website is using cookie technology. The "Cookie", in essence, is bit of data that websites store in browser. All browsers has to support it, because it is defined in web standards. On one hand, cookie functionality enables better site experience. On the other hand, it can be used to track users without them knowing.

The idea behind the law is to make users aware that this website is storing information into their browsers. However the solution of making every website in the world implement the dialogue is... let me see how can i put it - unrealistic

Much better solution would be making browsers to implement this functionality.

Here is a list of reasons why:
  1. If browsers are implementing this functionality users would be given possibility to opt out if they really don't want to be informed (YAY to that)
  2. If website is using cookies, browser knows about it, and therefore will show the notice on ALL websites using the technology. This would cover 100% websites with one go, and not rely on site owners to remember implementing the confirmation dialogue.
  3. It will save wast amount of development resources spent on building solutions for every website. Just imagine how many websites there are versus how many browsers there are. It will also save wast amount of controlling resources that monitor if the websites are following the law 
  4. Having information about cookies presented in the same manner for all websites would it make easier for users to perceive the information. It's much better than each website coming up with their own text and formatting.
  5. Solutions in browser can be made to show what information exactly is stored in browser, so user can make better decision. It gives me no value to know that website is storing something somewhere. However if I see that website is saving information about me that I'm not comfortable with, It might actually be useful and I might decide to not visit the website any more.
  6. It is easy to control which users should see the message and which not. The browser would just need to know if the user is in the affected territory (EU) or not.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does http-equiv stands for?

Many web developers uses meta http-equiv tag, without solid understanding what does it means. http-equiv stands for: hypertext transfer protocol equivalent and is equivalent to HTTP response header. So putting: <http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <META http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> in HTML as meta TAG has the same effect as declaring HTTP response header Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 That is why they are called ‘equivalent’. It is recommended to use HTTP header over HTML http-equiv meta tags. Multiple headers with the same name may be present only if the values may be concatenated.
Read more

What is the difference between conjecture and hypothesis?

Similarities. Both of them are statements based on observations, that seem to be true, but have not been proved or disproved jet. Differences . As explained in G.Pólya and L.Bowden book "Mathematical methods in science", difference is in level of credibility that explanation is based on. Hypothesis is testable, and explanation is based on accepted grounds. Conjecture is proposition based on inconclusive grounds, and sometimes can not be fully tested. Another difference is that conjectures, unlike hypothesis, are used in math. Hypothesis usualy are used elsewhere. If conjecture is proven, it becomes a theorem . Still, the border between two terms remains blurry, and terms sometimes are used as synonyms. For example in math there is a conjecture called ' Riemann hypothesis ', which correctly should be called ‘Riemann conjecture’.
Read more