Hacker News Reader

Comment by wtfstatists | Hacker News Reader

Sadly this is illegal in EU. You have to offer both Free+ClassD and Free+ClassA versions otherwise its forced consent.

I have written more about this here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892

Does this essentially force companies to charge for services in the EU then? The only reason FB, Google, etc even offer "free" services is because they make money on the backend utilizing the data they collect. If everyone can say "don't collect my data but also keep my service free", I'm not sure how a business can remain viable in the EU without charging some type of subscription or micro-transaction fee.

Maybe this is how the whole web-based fee structure should have been setup in the first place but it's not the current deal we have in place. How difficult will it be to shift an entire industry (and consumer mindset) to a vastly different fee structure?

They can still show ads, and they can still be relevant to whatever page the user is currently viewing.

Since they do such a terrible job of it anyway I can't imagine it being less profitable.

And then again, maybe actually paying for something like facebook is the right way to go.

Yeah, that's a good point. If the whole advertising landscape forcibly moves away from direct targeting, presumably the same players retain the same position in the marketplace they have now (with the possible exception of ad dollars moving to other media if web is seen as less effective in general without direct targeting).

Why wouldn't advertising still work without pervasive tracking? If targeting ads based just on content works for TV, radio and print media, why wouldn't it work for online advertising?

Why "sadly"?

Well, I think that is the best part. There is no need nor usefulness of greedy parasitic companies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com