<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>mfontani</author><text>One can include ads and analytics without consent being granted - they&amp;#x27;re &amp;quot;just&amp;quot; restricted to a method of delivering ads and performing analytics which don&amp;#x27;t track the user.&lt;p&gt;IANAL, mind you - but that&amp;#x27;s how we implemented it - you&amp;#x27;re opting-in to the ads that target you and analytics which track you, or you get the non-tracking&amp;#x2F;non-targeting ads and analytics.</text><parent_chain><item><author>notechback</author><text>They are not mandatory, it&amp;#x27;s a choice by the site owner to include them. They are only mandatory if you include tracking features that track users across the web (= ads and Google analytics).</text></item><item><author>dcow</author><text>Cookie banners have taken the internet back 20 years. Now every website has a mandatory &lt;i&gt;popup&lt;/i&gt;. And you can’t block these new breed because they&amp;#x27;re part of the site.</text></item><item><author>elric</author><text>Tangent: I wish the idiom of &amp;quot;placing&amp;quot; cookies would go away. Websites don&amp;#x27;t &amp;quot;place&amp;quot; cookies. Websites can include cookies in their HTTP responses. Your browser can include them in future requests. But it doesn&amp;#x27;t have to. There is nothing in the HTTP spec that says you have to accept cookies or include them in subsequent requests. There certainly isn&amp;#x27;t any reason to &amp;quot;place&amp;quot; them on your computer.&lt;p&gt;If more browsers were still User Agents in the literal sense, maybe we wouldn&amp;#x27;t have needed this legislation. Browsers could have informed people about what cookies were, and could have presented the user with the option to never accept tracking cookies from Big Advertising. Every browser has the option to reject third party cookies or to clear all cookies at the end of the browser session.&lt;p&gt;This mischaracterization of cookies has, ironically, made life a lot less pleasant for people who don&amp;#x27;t accept cookies. The &amp;quot;opt-out&amp;quot; is just another cookie. There&amp;#x27;s nothing special about them either, they can be used to track return visitors just as well as any other cookie. I&amp;#x27;m sure they&amp;#x27;re not, because that would be against the spirit of the law ...&lt;p&gt;Not tracking people without consent is definitely a Good Thing, but it shouldn&amp;#x27;t require everyone and their grandmother to put annoying cookie banners on every website under the sun. And I think it wouldn&amp;#x27;t have, had people been better informed.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>No cookie consent walls, scrolling isn’t consent, says EU data protection body</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/06/no-cookie-consent-walls-and-no-scrolling-isnt-consent-says-eu-data-protection-body/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>nicbou</author><text>&amp;gt; across the web&lt;p&gt;That part is not necessary. They are mandatory if you collect any form of personal data without legitimate interest.</text><parent_chain><item><author>notechback</author><text>They are not mandatory, it&amp;#x27;s a choice by the site owner to include them. They are only mandatory if you include tracking features that track users across the web (= ads and Google analytics).</text></item><item><author>dcow</author><text>Cookie banners have taken the internet back 20 years. Now every website has a mandatory &lt;i&gt;popup&lt;/i&gt;. And you can’t block these new breed because they&amp;#x27;re part of the site.</text></item><item><author>elric</author><text>Tangent: I wish the idiom of &amp;quot;placing&amp;quot; cookies would go away. Websites don&amp;#x27;t &amp;quot;place&amp;quot; cookies. Websites can include cookies in their HTTP responses. Your browser can include them in future requests. But it doesn&amp;#x27;t have to. There is nothing in the HTTP spec that says you have to accept cookies or include them in subsequent requests. There certainly isn&amp;#x27;t any reason to &amp;quot;place&amp;quot; them on your computer.&lt;p&gt;If more browsers were still User Agents in the literal sense, maybe we wouldn&amp;#x27;t have needed this legislation. Browsers could have informed people about what cookies were, and could have presented the user with the option to never accept tracking cookies from Big Advertising. Every browser has the option to reject third party cookies or to clear all cookies at the end of the browser session.&lt;p&gt;This mischaracterization of cookies has, ironically, made life a lot less pleasant for people who don&amp;#x27;t accept cookies. The &amp;quot;opt-out&amp;quot; is just another cookie. There&amp;#x27;s nothing special about them either, they can be used to track return visitors just as well as any other cookie. I&amp;#x27;m sure they&amp;#x27;re not, because that would be against the spirit of the law ...&lt;p&gt;Not tracking people without consent is definitely a Good Thing, but it shouldn&amp;#x27;t require everyone and their grandmother to put annoying cookie banners on every website under the sun. And I think it wouldn&amp;#x27;t have, had people been better informed.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>No cookie consent walls, scrolling isn’t consent, says EU data protection body</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/06/no-cookie-consent-walls-and-no-scrolling-isnt-consent-says-eu-data-protection-body/</url></story>