We can all see the results of it. It made the web experience worse for everyone and it’s so complicated it solidified the power of the few companies that either can comply with it or afford to ignore it and deal with the slap on the wrist.
Thought experiment: why didn’t any major ad tech company announce any harmful affects of the 99 section GDPR. But they did announce billions in revenues shortfall (ie Meta) when Apple made tracking opt in by one three line dialog box?
> We can all see the results of it. It made the web experience worse for everyone
This bullshit again. It wasn't the GDPT that made the web worse. This is is entirely on the companies who took a look at GDPR and said: no, we're going to ignore it, continue siphoning user data, and trick users into "consent" through dark patterns (actually illegal under GDPR).
> Thought experiment: why didn’t any major ad tech company announce any harmful affects of the 99 section GDPR. But they did announce billions in revenues shortfall (ie Meta) when Apple made tracking opt in by one three line dialog box?
Funny how you don't conduct a thought experiment on why cookie pop-ups exist and what GDPR has to say about this.
It’s amazing that the excuse for the web being worse is always “the web being worse is not caused by the law being bad. It’s caused by it being badly enforced”.
The fact is that the cookie pop ups would never be necessary if the GDPR hadn’t been passed.
> the web being worse is not caused by the law being bad. It’s caused by it being badly enforced
Because that's the truth
> The fact is that the cookie pop ups would never be necessary if the GDPR hadn’t been passed.
Show me exactly where GDPR mandates the use of cookie pop ups.
(Hint: GDPR mandates: "ask the user for consent if you collect more data than is strictly necessary, and the opt-out must be as simple as opt-in". Guess who decided they should continue siphoning all possible user data and trick users into giving this data with dark patterns)
(Another hint: AppStore rule on tracking was more effective precisely because Apple has the possibility to enforce it immediately. And still the greedy leeches like Facebook complained about the rule, not about their own practices)
> So the EU isn’t inept because they made a bad law. They are inept because they have no clue how to enforce it?
The law isn't bad. The EU knows how to enforce it.
> So the websites are asking the user - as the law dictates even if the buttons are the same size.
No.
1. The sites are willingly breaking the law in the absiolute vast majority of the cases
2. The sites don't even have to ask any of this if they simply stopped siphoning user data
> So you’re cheering the government making a law that made the user experience worse that the government couldn’t enforce?
It wasn't the law that made the experience worse. Does the law require the sites to siphon and sell your data to the highest bidder? No. The law says: if you do that, you have to tell the users about that, and obtain their consent before doing that. It's the industry of greedy leeches which made the experience worse. And you've bought into this industry's reasoning that it's the law that makes them do this.
Thought experiment: why didn’t any major ad tech company announce any harmful affects of the 99 section GDPR. But they did announce billions in revenues shortfall (ie Meta) when Apple made tracking opt in by one three line dialog box?