9 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2020
    1. These options have almost deceptively similar wordings, with only subtle difference that is too hard to spot at a glance (takes detailed comparison, which is fatiguing for a user):

      1. can use your browser’s information for providing advertising services for this website and for their own purposes.
      2. cannot use your browser’s information for purposes other than providing advertising services for this website.

      If you rewrite them to use consistent, easy-to-compare wording, then you can see the difference a little easier:

      1. can use your browser’s information for providing advertising services for this website and for their own purposes.
      2. can use your browser’s information for providing advertising services for this website <del>and for their own purposes</del>.

      Standard Advertising Settings

      This means our ad partners can use your browser’s information for providing advertising services for this website and for their own purposes.

      Do Not Share My Information other than for ads on this website

      This means that our ad partners cannot use your browser’s information for purposes other than providing advertising services for this website.

  2. Mar 2020
    1. it really doesn’t take much clicking around the regional Internet to find a gaslighting cookie notice that pops up with a mocking message saying by using this website you’re consenting to your data being processed how the site sees fit — with just a single ‘Ok’ button to affirm your lack of say in the matter.
    1. We are not sensible, free thinking decision making people. As an individual I imagine that you will say "Yes I am". That's the beauty of the entire system. Consciously individuals believe that they are in control and make their own choices and yet I have met and experienced very few who have full autonomy
    2. saying they give people all the controls they need to manage and control access to their information. But controls with dishonest instructions on how to use them aren’t really controls at all. And opt outs that don’t exist smell rather more like a lock in. 
    3. Facebook does not even offer an absolute opt out of targeted advertising on its platform. The ‘choice’ it gives users is to agree to its targeted advertising or to delete their account and leave the service entirely. Which isn’t really a choice when balanced against the power of Facebook’s platform and the network effect it exploits to keep people using its service.
    1. that permission must be freely obtained. Ergo, a free choice must be offered.So, in other words, a “data for access” cookie wall isn’t going to cut it. (Or, as the DPA puts it: “Permission is not ‘free’ if someone has no real or free choice. Or if the person cannot refuse giving permission without adverse consequences.”)
    1. On the other hand, asking them to check a box when they have very little idea what they’re agreeing to — and not giving them any other viable options — doesn’t seem to be an ideal solution.