Cookies message. Has anything changed or is it just to comply with the new law?

[MardyBra]

I'm getting more and more cynical of sites like Facebook and LinkedIn which are becoming very intrusive I'm the way they use data.

I just wondered if MN was doing anything new with cookies or if this is just to comply with the new law.

If I accept the cookies thing, does that mean that MN will now have the right to prise out every single thought I have, tell it to the world and then get everyone to advertise products to help me with said thoughts.

How do these links with Facebook and stuff work?

Sounds to me you have us by the proverbial short and curlies. Either we accept the cookies or we won't be able to post. Is that right?

The new law came into effect today, so pretty much every site using cookies needs to show that. There's no mechanism for enforcement yet, so many aren't. It requires an explicit opt-in to cookies rather than the previous opt- out. The cookies will be the same or, more correctly, change like they always did.

Pretty much Dutch

I have to admit that I don't really know how intrusive the cookies are - or even how Mn's privacy policy works tbh.

If I namechange to say I've got any itchy vagine for example, will Facebook know. Will i get an itchy fanjo status. Will I get targeted with Canestan ads?

Who has access to name change info at MNHQ and how is data protected?

I dare you to try

I have an Internet Security package that wipes out all the cookies whenever I want, usually several times a day.

I can specify the ones I want to keep, like the ones that log me on to websites, but this has got more difficult since the Cookie files no longer have the website in their name.

In most cases (i.e. sites that I don't trust enough to log me in) I set to "Block Cookie" "Apply this decision to all cookies from this website"

It asks the question each time I go to a site that wants to load cookies, which is a bit of a drag at first, but it only asks once per site, so after a while all the ones you frequently use have been done. You can always change the settings if you want, e.g. to make a purchase.

I am especially suspicious of American sites such as Google that seem to have embarked on a policy of World Domination and gathering all information about everybody.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1475664-To-feel-a-bit-put-out-about-my-googling-habits-being-announced-on-facebook?msgid=31840187

Threads like this get me worried

or this one

It's not that I have anything particular to hide. My fanjo is fine although I might use Facebook to look up the odd old acquaintance but I just don't trust anyone any more. And I wondered whether that should now extend to MN...

I've clicked 'accept cookies' about 6 times now and the message won't go away.

I haven't clicked on it yet. But I feel it is inevitable as I would never bear going back to being a mere lurker.

IT WON'T GO AWAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!

Same here. i click and it stares right back at me and won't go away

Hello. Yes, the cookies message is now compulsory - by law.

But nothing has changed in the way we use them on Mumsnet.

It's just that instead of assuming your consent for us to use them (to remember you log in etc) when you tick the "privacy policy" box upon registration, we are now required to make a message pop up asking you to explicitly give your consent. Which is probably more transparent, tbh.

Sorry that the message is not going away, though. That shouldn't be happening.

Is it still there? If so, we'll contact Tech...

But Helen could you eleborate on why cookies exist and how Mumsnet uses them please

No message on mobile site btw...

Apart from "keep me logged in", how else are the cookies used, please?

I thought it meant extra biscuits for everyone so I accepted.

Mariasaurus, cookies can do a multitude of things.

For example, the other day I was looking at various items on the John Lewis website. A couple of lampshades, some outdoor lights, and fridges.

The following day I was on ebay. On ebay, there was an ad from John Lewis, showing on rotation the very same items I had been looking at the previous day...

Cookies can track what people are looking at on different websites, and track it across the net to other websites. I could equally have seen the adverts for the items I was looking at on the JL website when logging into Facebook next time.

Cookies can also track every "Like" or "Recommend" button you click, ensuring that the site you Liked or Recommended can track you and what you do onto other websites, thus displaying an ad on your facebook, but also about themselvs on other sites you visit.

Mostly cookie data is used to analyze traffic. Such as which section of a website is visited most. Or what Ad you clicked on from that website, so that the advertiser gets statistics about his ad spend, as most campaigns are pay per click. And this is how mn makes money! The more we click, the more they are paid. However, if the advertiser find that lots of people click their ads, and dont continue looking at the site and exploring it, they may decide that those clicks are not worth it and they are paying for nothing at all. The cookies track where you go after clicking on an ad, all the sections of a site you visit. Say, you click on the Boden ad. Boden then pay mn. If you just click on the ad and close the site window down, Boden wont be happy. But if you continue to spend time on their site, looking at the different things they sell, they will be very happy as people have taken an interest. If this leads to you buying something, they will be ecstatic! It was worth paying for adplacement, if they lead to people spending money. So, from the retailer (and MN) perspective cookies are good. For us, it does not really matter. I am not ashamed to visit Boden now and then, and I have even spent money there. Son loves his PJs.

Hello again. In answer to your Qs, here is what cookies do on Mumsnet

As we said upthread, nothing new and, hopefully, nothing too weird or scary.

Do please post up any other Qs you have and we'll do our best to help.

And by QS HelenMumsnet does not mean me, but questions.

@QuintessentialShadows

And by QS HelenMumsnet does not mean me, but questions.

Indeed.

Please don't post up QS - that might be painful

There's all kinds of cookies - first party, session, persistent, 3rd party...

Cookies are not to be feared. Most cookies enable a site to function in the way you see it now, and are not evil data stealing things. Other cookies assist in the (anonymised) collection of data for things like Google Analytics, or enable you to stay logged in, or store your preferences in a given way.

For the most part, first party, persistent and session cookies are nothing for the average user to worry about. Not accepting these cookies would have an affect on how a given site functions for you.

The worst kind of cookies are 3rd party - they are used aggressively by 3rd party advertisers and usually result in annoying spammy pop-ups. Most reputable sites never use 3rd party cookies.

The EU directive on cookies, obtaining consent and data privacy aims to make the gaining of consent and informed decision making for the user much more transparent. For web managers like me, it is a logistical nightmare. For the user, seeing this new message about being asked consent to continue will probably make them more nervous until it becomes the norm.

It is literally saying - all those cookies that made the site function for you before? Now you've gotta accept that function first before the site will function, is all.

MN doesn't have you by the short and curlies. MN has to comply with the EU directive that is aiming to make MN more transparent to you about what it has always done - which is namely to offer you functionality such as staying logged in, functionality that requires certain kinds of cookies. It is pretty much the opposite to what you're afraid of - if MN was selling your data, it would have to let you know in that message, not use that message to then sell your data.

I hope this helps - pity me, I manage 27 sites in Europe, all with different local data privacy laws and all must also be compliant with this directive!

Can you explain, then, please, why practically no sites have a "no I don't want cookies" opt-out?
If it's the law there's got to be a warning but you can't view the site without accepting cookies, what good does the law do?