Over the last few weeks I have noticed a behaviour in myself.

Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦

They're not losing business. Their business is to sell tracked impressions to surveillance vendors, so deny all and a lost reader are both worth nothing.
@mike @glynmoody

Dziadek

@mike

Me too.

And I turn back on sites which give me the MAYBE LATER option instead of NO.

Alan

@mike yes, this is what I do. At first I stressed over the “should I or shouldn’t I” decisions, then just decided I didn’t need that in my life, and that turned out to be correct

Rubber Side Down 🇨🇦

@mike

I will not view a site if reject all isn’t available

Andreas K

@mike More or less, I'm not religious about it, but yes, I'm also noticing a strong "I don't bother attitude".

Cassandrich

@mike The worst slimy pattern is doing this with a complicated preferences panel that, when you finally click "save preferences", puts up a box saying there was an error saving preferences and kicks you back to the start. Instant nope. Breaking law, attempting plausible deniability, exploiting sunk cost fallacy.

Meznor UNGRATEFUL MIDDLE POWER

@mike I definitely do this (but I also go down their stupid UI-nightmare rabbit hole to see if I have options first, and usually it’s buried in there somewhere).

Lazy B0y

@mike
i admit too often im too curious and still do the extra clicks to get to the content and sometimes, which is also way too often, i also click „accept all“

the most important fact:

„we care about privacy“ is a lie if it’s coming in a cookie banner.

who really cares about privacy can do real necessary cookies without additional banner.
who does it anyway deserves no click at all - not reject all, not extra preferences settings, and least accept all

Nonya Bidniss :CIAverified: 🇺🇸

@mike Been doing it since the day I first encountered it

Matteꙮ Italia

@mike Same, but if I'm really interested and there's no easy way to reject all I open the page in an anonymous window.

Andreas K

@gim @mike @jokeyrhyme That's another try to be US-Bigtech friendly by the politicians/EU commission.
The problem the runway for that is getting shorter and shorter. The last time (In the never ending Schrems Saga) the ECJ bound the GDPR privacy rights literally directly to the Charter, so bending the GDPR to weaken privacy literally would require EU Treaty changes.
So the whole thing the EU Commission is planning stands on wooden feet, but it will buy the "IT industry" a couple of months/years.

Jez Caudle :verified:

@mike @dangillmor Same.

Anna Spanner 👩‍🏫🇪🇺🇬🇧

@mike Yes indeed! but I fear we are a minority. Fediverse-based sample group probably a bit biased.

Brian

@mike I do that too!
Relatedly I have been getting completely blocked pages because I use an ad blocker and am redirected to a page that says I need to allow them to serve content I don’t want. I don’t follow that either.

b3lt3r

@mike #metoo

Frieke

@mike ‍️ same

Jernej Simončič �

@jokeyrhyme @mike EU should've made adherence to Do Not Track mandatory.

kryten

@mike I could be mistaken but I think if you have 3rd party (cross site) cookies blocked in your browser settings it doesn't matter what cookies they try to set.

Nicky

@mike I do this too.

If it's something I feel like I "need" to read then I open it in Duck and burn after reading. Don't know if it's ideal but makes me feel better at least.

I'd honestly prefer them to say "we're tracking you and sharing your data to make money" than read "we care about your privacy" one more time.

Miss Gayle

@mike

That's exactly what I do. I'm not going to jump through hoops. There's no article worth all that, and there's always somebody else who wrote about that topic.