this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
737 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

76899 readers
3384 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
737
Surprise EU rollback of 'GDPR' digital-rights rules prompts alarm (euobserver.com)
submitted 1 week ago by schizoidman@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world
128 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/52834195

https://archive.is/je5sj

“If adopted, these amendments would not simplify compliance but hollow out the GDPR’s and ePrivacy’s core guarantees: purpose limitation, accountability, and independent oversight,” Itxaso Dominguez de Olazabal, from the European Digital Rights group, told EUobserver.

The draft includes adjustments to what is considered “personal data,” a key component of the GDPR and protected by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

It's different groups of people with different interests.

Also doesn't help that the cookie banners were a kind of malicious compliance. They were made deliberately difficult to navigate around when you didn't immediate hit "accept everything unequivocally".

That the response to this malicious compliance is a retreat rather than a doubling down suggests the EU regulators are compromised by the industry and this isn't a popular reform in any meaningful sense.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 13 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Yeah; the response should be that a "reject all" button must be displayed next to the accept all button with equal prominence, and define prominence to mean the same size, with similar contrast to the accept all button and clearly labelled.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Yeah; the response should be that a “reject all” button must be displayed next to the accept all button with equal prominence

I'll do you one better. "Websites should default to the minimal cookies option, with settings confined to a website option menu that does not occlude the entrance page."

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I think a better way might be that browsers can auto-decline all cookies.

Why would the user have to click on each cookie banner separately?

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago

Yeah, the malicious compliance was what should have been regulated instead. Ban the annoying cookie popup and require sites to make it opt-in by default. At most, sites should be allowed to have an option in a burger menu to allow cookies, and clicking that button would open the popup to specify which cookies you wanted to allow.