Hacker News Reader

Comment by Anonboxis | Hacker News Reader

Look out for the "Digital Fairness Act", which will be tabled by the European Commission in November. It is expected to include the same "Click to Cancel" principle continent-wide.

Source: I'm an EU digital policy analyst in Brussels.

View on HN

According to https://digitalfairnessact.com/what-is-the-digital-fairness-... fucking cookie banners will be a lot better. OMG

Where does that page mention anything about cookie banners? I couldnt find it

Probably this bit:

> “Dark patterns” (also called deceptive or manipulative design) are interface choices that steer users towards decisions they would not otherwise make, for example:

> Making the “accept all” option bright and prominent, but hiding “reject” or “manage settings”

Not a direct reference, but it's clear exactly what it's getting at.

Wouldn't call it a big win though. If it's not established as a browser level setting instead of some shitty per-website banner that expires every 3 weeks as the site adjusts its ad serving system once again? We're still in cookie law hell.

> Making the “accept all” option bright and prominent, but hiding “reject” or “manage settings”

Isn't this already illegal? By law the websites are required to make full opt out single click. They just don't care.

Yes.

Honestly all these kinds of laws should take an example out of EU261 (the flight compensation regulation) book. Set statutory damages and allow private right of action. Air carriers certainly have started to follow law much harder than many other industries after people realized they could fairly easily get compensation when carriers didn't fulfill their obligations.

I looked at the page you linked and could not see any reference to cookie banners.

Interessatingly according to https://www.verbraucherzentrale.de/wissen/digitale-welt/onli...

games will be regulated and cant be easily shut down. Lets see what "Stop killing games" will say.

edit: According above website had too optimistic interpretation. Anyway it looks like Stop Killing Game transforms into pro-consumer video games association. And thats overdue and yet very interesting and missing.

Damn this looks too good to be real, where's the provision to make any kind of encryption illegal ?

It looks good reading it like this but I am always scared about the unintended effects. Like the ... cookie banners. Dynamic pricing absolutely has to go this is so unethical

The cookie banners are not required to be this way. They are deliberately designed to be as annoying as they can legally be (many actually moreso), in part to influence your perspective against GDPR.

The big problem with cookie banners is that they are quite often just outright in violation of the law, and just getting away with it.

I was really hoping for the EU to be more strict in enforcement. Guess they don't feel so strong in trade negotiations right now.

Here in the US, there is also the problem that people are way too overcome with FOMO about the dumbest stuff. I knew someone who would hit "Accept all" instantly for every dialog, and then I helped her with something and clicked the (mostly required and reliable) "Reject all" button instead, and when the site just loaded up and worked after that, she was shocked and said "I didn't know you could do that"

I don't know how to respond to that! The dialog openly tells you every single time that only the "Necessary" cookies are required and you can't turn those off, and every other option can be turned off.

People just don't read! Ever! At all! Their life could depend on it and they would panic instead of just reading one damn sentence in a dialog box and at this point I no longer accept "The industry trained them this way" as an excuse since this affects multiple generations who had dramatically different computing experiences.

In the modern day, every single American can usually access information about anything they want. They can try to answer any question they have. They can try and clear up anything confusing to them. They can form educated opinions!

They watch TikTok instead

> [...] tackle [...] Addictive design of apps, games and digital services [...]

My guess is age verification + ID to access social media, "inappropriate" games, etc.

I made that website!

In the US, tabled means something is not going forward. Am I correct that it means the opposite there?

Yes tabled means the opposite on either side of the Atlantic. Has caused me a lot of confusion over the years. Personally as a Brit I just can’t see the logic in the US meaning

As an American, I can't see the logic in having the relationship between a proposal (which is an idea that may be embodied in documentation) and a table (which is a thing that we rest our beer upon) as having any importance at all -- regardless of which way it goes.

It seems like plain speech could be used, but this profoundly-irrational jargon was selected instead.

I think in the UK sense 'tabled' is borne out of a pretty literal meaning - based on the proposal literally being brought to the table where the committee are meeting to assess (and potentially vote) on its viability.

Yeah, perhaps. But the table also has all kinds of other things on and around it. Random papers of varying importance, microphones, Representative Smith's porn phone with the privacy filter, and maybe a ham sandwich.

A table (if there even is one present at all) seems like about the least important part of a group discussion of an idea.

it's the item of furniture that everyone is sitting round. the fact that people might put other things on it is about as relevant as asking why one particular person is called the Chair when everyone is seated, or why it's a conference room when the cleaners happen to also do hoovering in there.

I guess US `tabled` means put in a writing table drawer, hidden and soon to forgotten.

I think it (The US version) means putting papers from my hands because I'm discussing them back down on the table surface where they will rest with my other notes.

In contrast to the UK meaning which seems to be to take the topic from a briefcase under the table and place it for discussion on the table in front of everyone.

The US sense came about from the sense of "I'm setting this on the table while we discuss other things". The meaning then evolved a bit of sarcasm with "while we do other things", starting to mean "forever". I do agree that the UK meaning makes more sense though.

Table the motion. (discuss); Table the discussion. (postpone)

Continue the story. (keep reading); Continue the trial. (suspend)

Drop the album. (release); Drop the charges. (abandon)

Sanction an event. (approve); Sanction a country. (penalize)

Cleave to principles. (stick); Cleave wood. (split)

Clip keys to belt. (attach); Clip the hedges. (cut off)

Dust shelves. (remove); Dust pastries with sugar. (add)

Hold fast. (fixed in place); Walk fast. (moving quickly)

Make oversight. (omission); Provide oversight. (scrutiny)

Peruse the ancient manuscript. (read in detail); Peruse the magazine. (look through casually)

The alarm went off. (activated); Turn the alarm off. (deactivated)

Head to either side of the street. (one or the other); Plant trees on either side of the street. (both)

It's yet to be found. (not found); Yet it's found. (found)

They're all but forgotten. (nearly); They're known but to God. (only)

Does "all but" always mean "nearly"? I've been conversing in English for 20 years now but this one eluded me.

I guess I am just unable to parse the words to piece together such a meaning. In my mind, there are two ways to interpret it: "this subject may be all kinds of things, but one thing it is not" (all but = everything except), or the opposite "this subject may be all kinds of things, but one thing it is for sure". And neither of these means "nearly" :(

Yes. I think the idea is that on the path of events or actions between the starting point and the target, you have already completed every single one, and all that remains now is the final step before you can call it done.

You've walked all but the last step of the journey.

Thank you, that makes sense!

The outcome of the meeting was negative (bad); the outcome of the cancer screening was negative (good)

That one doesn’t belong - if the meeting was deciding the death sentence, negative could be good.

Mostly correct but peruse only means read in detail. Any other intended meaning is mistaken.

Both Merriam-Webster and Cambridge dictionaries disagree.

Funny, I noted that one but in the opposite direction. In North America I've never heard it used in anything but a casual sense. An unserious activity.

Agree with siblings. Living in NYC and born nearby, and I've always known peruse to mean casually browse. Flip through pages. NOT read in detail.

These are known as contronyms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contronym

This looks really great, thank you for your work! However, "Entry into force" really is expected only around 2030? I'm not even sure most people will be consuming the internet using a browser then. It's sad to see that a process like this, which is very much needed, starts at 2020 and ends 10 years later. Clearly not your fault, but I'm just a little shocked.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com