• Mwa@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    How about the rare sites that respected it 🤔

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          so not small at all. i see you corrected the post too.

          the main response to that is: how do you know they respect it?

          • Mwa@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Odysee it says in their privacy policy when they detect do not track is on they wont track you,At&t and boradcomm they have a system that sees the signal and declines tracking automatically

  • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is sad and yet another step backwards for Firefox. Yes, not many websites honored it, but some did and automatically set cookie preferences accordingly. There should’ve been more lobbying for this to become legally binding within the EU instead.

    • Vincent@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Presumably it’s easier to lobby for something that’s already legally enforced elsewhere. And sometimes lobbying is just unsuccessful.

      With a reasonable alternative available, removing the additional fingerprinting vector seems like the best idea to avoid tracking. The few good actors can look at the Global Privacy Control instead, so there’s literally no downside here.

    • TheTwelveYearOld@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It was a double-edged sword. While websites could honor it, it could also be abused as another data point for fingerprinting.

        • Laser@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          How are you going to prove that this particular metric was used to fingerprint? That’s the issue I have - you can identify cookies, pixel trackers etc but there’s no way to prove whether a site uses a flag you send anyways. And enforcing something that can’t be proven is really hard - currently, not only the easy rules are enforced.

          • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If it was law to abide to the Do Not Track setting, then a leak about a company dishonoring this would simply face massive fines, which is usually enough encouragement for them to abide.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Good, it’s about time the lie of Do Not Track was put to bed. It gives people a false sense of control over their data and privacy - the intention was good but if it’s not enforced then it makes people think they’ve done something to protect their privacy when they have done nothing.

      • kbal@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Its removal is as useful in preventing fingerprinting as its presence was in protecting privacy.