Reply to post: Re: Bull

Ad-blocker blocking websites face legal peril at hands of privacy bods

Ben Tasker

Re: Bull

But do they?

I've seen this excuse used in so many places. You don't actually get a choice as the damage is often done before you even get a chance to say "no"

Nail on the head.

Generally, you visit a site because the page you're browsing to looks like it might contain the information you're currently after. But, until you visit, you have no idea what the "cost" will be - what JS will run, what third party trackers they use etc.

Once you've found out (and most users never do, because they don't look), it's too late, because it's already happened. All you can do is not visit in future, limiting it to one occurence (for that site). Which means it isn't anywhere close to informed consent and doesn't count.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon