Wow I didn't know the law even talks about Do-Not-Track. It's a distraction posing as a solution. The time spent talking about Do-Not-Track could be spent on useful things such as contributing to torbrowser.
Hm I think most would agree with a statement like this. On the other hand I think it's important for privacy laws to be in place. We all know how regulations are lagging years behind, so theoretically, this is just the beginning.
In the meantime it's important to comply with it with the simplest means possible imo. That's what we're trying to help with.
It's even more important to not introduce privacy laws that are misleading and give a false sense of security, thus averting public from the core problem.
If you can be tracked you will be tracked, eventually but almost inevitably. The law could be used to provide some remedy for damages caused by tracking, but it should be introduced only after core problem with tracking (browsers willingly tag users for indefinite time with invisible tokens, in an quite stealthy manner) is solved.
Hard to argue with that @drdaeman. Let's say in an ideal world I'd agree with every last thing you said. Again, it sure isn't perfect, it may be a start. Worse than no developments at all? We're doing our job at iubenda to help developers/website operators to keep up with the developments that are out there right now.
