lol, Heises own site doesnt have it. https://imgur.com/Z4opJ0r
this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
178 points (100.0% liked)
Privacy
2261 readers
52 users here now
Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.
Rules
PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!
- Be civil and no prejudice
- Don't promote big-tech software
- No apathy and defeatism for privacy (i.e. "They already have my data, why bother?")
- No reposting of news that was already posted
- No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
- No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)
Related communities:
Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.
- !opensource@programming.dev
- !selfhosting@slrpnk.net / !selfhosted@lemmy.world
- !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !drm@lemmy.dbzer0.com
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
Do as I say. Not as I do. — Heise
In before all the top 100 sites just add a deny button that takes you to a 404 page, or some unformatted XML
They'll just continue to ignore the law. This requirement has been in place since before the first wave of cookie banners.
Well, punishments will hopefully become less tame now that there's been a clear precedent. Companies won't be able to argue anymore that they had a different understanding of the law...
A reject all button would appear on every page because the website wouldn't remember that you rejected cookies.
It has never been forbidden to store first party cookies required for site functionality. This includes remembering the banner setting.
In particular, the GDPR only concerns itself with personal data. The only reason a news webpage needs a cookie banner, is because they do tracking.
I would also argue that even a shopping webpage doesn't need a cookie banner either, because you express your consent when you click that "Add to Cart" button.
The only reason cookie banners are so prevalent is due to fearmongering by the ad industry. They had to convince webpages that they'd need a cookie banner whether they do ads/tracking or not.
This is exactly correct.
We've developed a bunch of web applications for our customers, none of them do cookie-based tracking or ads, and as a result we do not need to show a banner.
For the simple reason that (without it) we get questions about it from users, there is a little blurb on our login pages that states in broad terms; "This site does not serve up tracking cookies. We only serve cookies required to make the site work, such as keeping you logged in, or storing your preferences".
The advertisement industry ran an extremely effective disinformation campaign to make people think every website needed a banner, and to nag people into hating a law that works in their interest.
Im fine with this