<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Privacy on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</title>
		<link>https://hitesh.in/tags/privacy/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Privacy on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-US</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://hitesh.in/tags/privacy/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>The cookie banner was consent theater. AI is building its own.</title>
				<link>https://hitesh.in/2026/consent-theater/</link>
				<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://hitesh.in/2026/consent-theater/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;Roughly &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.advance-metrics.com/en/blog/cookie-behaviour-study/&#34;&gt;90% of people click &amp;ldquo;accept&amp;rdquo;&lt;/a&gt; on a cookie banner when rejecting takes an extra click or two. Ask those same people whether they actually want to be tracked and &lt;a href=&#34;https://killthecookiebanner.eu/&#34;&gt;about 3%&lt;/a&gt; say yes. That gap, between the click and the wish, is the most instructive number in technology policy right now, and almost nobody arguing about AI is looking at it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A cookie banner never measured consent. It measured how much friction a person will absorb before they surrender and hit the biggest button. Europe ran that experiment across its entire internet for over a decade, and the verdict is in: consent collected at the moment of maximum annoyance is worthless as a signal and expensive as a habit. We are now wiring the same machine into how AI gets governed, and the people making product and policy calls can still decline to build it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
