
The Do-Not-Track Act of 2019 - soheilpro
https://spreadprivacy.com/do-not-track-act-2019/
======
martin_a
> Our recent study on the Do Not Track (DNT) browser setting indicated that
> about a quarter of people have turned on this setting, and most were unaware
> big sites do not respect it.

I have not enabled it for this reason. Any site can just ignore it and there's
nothing you can do about it.

So I take care of that myself with running a PiHole, uBlock and alike.

~~~
dngray
The reason I don't use it is because it can make your browser fingerprint more
unique.

As a result I use uBlock, uMatrix, Temporary containers.

More info about that configuration here: [https://github.com/dngray/ghacks-
user.js/tree/fx-desktop](https://github.com/dngray/ghacks-user.js/tree/fx-
desktop)

------
kgwxd
If this problem has to be solved by law then the laws should be the reverse,
privacy by default, opt-in to tracking, laws about how that opt-in is
presented and verified.

~~~
username444
The EU cookies consent law is a prime example of how worthless this is. Easily
99% of sites either don't display this warning, or display it with no
"decline" option.

I can think of 2 instances over the past year where I've been able to "do not
accept".

I completely agree with the proposed legislation, but it's pointless without
consistent, continuous enforcement. They need to be fining sites a small
amount UNFAILINGLY across the board. $10 per violation (being unable to show
opt-in consent) with no appeals.

Not the trackers (Facebook, Google et Al), but the actual sites (eg. NYT)
who've implemented them. They'll drop it REAL QUICK until it's been properly
implemented.

But who actually has the budget for enforcement? I don't know the answer to
this.

