For years, Google Maps has been a go-to tool for millions worldwide, seamlessly integrated into search results for instant access to directions, locations, and more. But if you’ve noticed something missing recently, you’re not imagining things. Due to European Union regulations, Google has been forced to remove its Maps functionality from its search results, marking a significant shift in how we interact with the tech giant’s ecosystem.
I can’t tell whether you’re being intentionally ironic. Yes the EU would be up for it. The EU didn’t ban cookies. Putting it simply, you do not need a cookie banner if you aren’t tracking people.
Im a web dev and I build almost all of my sites without cookie banner unless they’re really required (YouTube embeds, invasive tracking etc) and when I don’t include a banner, people usually think I forgot it.
It’s a shame that most people think the internet just has to be crap now and every site needs some dark pattern banner to track its users.
A dark pattern would be some sort of underhanded but legal tactic to trick or coerce a user into agreeing to something they wouldn’t otherwise.
But most websites aren’t using dark patterns for this, instead they just blatantly and plainly violate the law.
There needs to be a browser that auto blocks all cookies, and all cookie banners. You can whitelist the sites you want. Beyond that, your browser tells all the web “fuck you!”
Firefox + uBlock Origin does that for me. You just need to enable the Annoyances filter.
Brave does mostly a good job with this. Though some cookie banners still slip through, and other functional popups get blocked. Still makea browsing the Web more palatable.
This is true. No cookie banners, no ads. Hardly ever a problem
I’m unclear why you’re being downvoted for sharing reccomendations. So, because I’ve experienced similiar issues when I DID understand the downvotes, I’ll assume someone downvoted you because Brave isn’t their browser of choice, and they’re sitting at their computer like “NO! NOT BRAVE! WHY DOESN’T EVERYONE USE (insert obscure browser which may actually be a better experience, but only 50 people have ever heard of) INSTEAD??? WHY MUST THEY RECCOMEND THE MAINSTREAM BROWSERS???”
And then 3pm comes, and it’s time for him to give his sheets to his mommy for the weekly laundry.
Meanwhile, me, someone who’s used Firefox exclusively since 2004, is thinking “Hmmmm, maybe I SHOULD branch out and try other browsers! I’m sure I could try Brave? I’ll be…BRAVE…enough to try a new browser!”
And then I give myself a big hearty laugh as I drink a sip of my hot chocolate, and proceed to live the rest of my life not giving a shit why you were downvoted. Oh, also, have an upvote!
Apt username.
Yeah, you’re not allowed to say anything positive about Brave on Lemmy. Instant downvote. Then downvotes for talking about it being down voted.
It’s like you said something neutral about AI, if you don’t shit on it, they brigade you down.
Yes it’s very good at eliminating cookies, it tracks and sells your data, but not as widely as the big guys.
It’s very good at fingerprint resistance too.
Firefox with UO, privacy badger is very close to it’s level of perf.
You can install stuff to block your telemetry in just about any browser, knock out a lot of your tracking but still get tracked by your browser maker, your OS, your ISP…
But talk about brave, they just get pissy.
Brave Browser Caught Redirecting Users Through Affiliate Links Also, I found Brave to be bloated with crypto/AI features. That being said, I see no reason to use it instead of Firefox.
Wow, that’s amazing and insightful. Repeating the same exact thing year after year for something that happened the better part of a decade ago must be exhausting.
The Crypto and the IPFS are there, They don’t even push you to use them. You can even right click the triangle and say remove from browser.
If you want a reasonable gripe, gripe that they’re selling your data. Grape the three default to their own search and sell that data.
Complain about anything interesting that copy and paste is old enough It should be getting ready for high school.
These are my own observations. Of course, I can put up with these shortcomings, but why should I if I can just use Firefox? It is the only non-Chromium browser that is more flexible thanks to css support.
To make it even more clear let me rephrase it:
If you want to store sth like that, it would be classified as functional and you wouldn’t even need a cookie banner for it.
Only if you want to use it to track people you need to notify them
Pretty much. Although I continue to be annoyed this ever even needed to be asked. There’s literally a browser setting to communicate this “do not track”. EU really should’ve just forced everyone to respect it :/.
I agree – and before DnT, there was P3P, which also would have done it – but it is what it is at the moment.
I’m mostly exasperated with it because I wipe all cookies each browser restart, which is a much more-reliable and less-obnoxious solution than the EU’s regulatory approach of trying to convince the remote end not to make use of its ability to set them. If you do that, you get the cookie banner every time on sites that show it, which means that the cookie banner regulation has made my experience rather worse. And unfortunately, some sites show the banner to non-EU-based users – we don’t elect EU representatives, but we still get some spillover from their policies.
There’s some Firefox plugin that will try to hide the cookie banners:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcareaboutcookies/
EDIT: Yeah, from the description on there, the author is doing exactly what I am with the “not retaining cookies” approach, and smacking into how poorly that interacts with the cookie banner regulation: