Several minutes waiting for site to work after clicking on "required cookies only". Is this really what privacy laws were aiming for?

Implementation. The implementation is bogus.

You do realize the difference?

It takes time to bake those cookies, why rush.

@IntrusionCM totally true.

However, how much ridiculous requirements you can put on industry until it collapses? Or starts producing such weird results?
I dont say that privacy is not important. I just wish someone would actually think about how their mighty ideas would be implemented and influence everyone. I did not see a single place where this stupid thing was easy to put in "no advertisement mode".

@str-write I think you got it wrong...

A lot of law is outdated, awkward and sometimes plain broken.

Agree.

New laws are kind a hard as the moment the law actually takes effect vs when it is written can be years apart.

Agree.

But I disagree blaming law for _wrong implementations on purpose_.

In Germany, quite a few extra laws had to be passed because most companies thought of clever ways to circumvent the intention of the law.

Intention was that you could make an _easy_ choice and _opt out_ instead of being opted in at all times.

I get very pissed at the fact of blaming the law - not at you personally - as many cookie banners are the exact opposite of this.

Eg. using colors for distraction (red for opt out, green for full agreement), making the cookie banner UI / UX wise a total desaster so opting in is the only option (e.g. progress bars and delaying shit for no clear reason) or complex clickity menus where you need 5 mins cause everything is retarded.

It's the implementation that sucks and is intentionally made to not fulfill the law, but instead trying to loophole out of it by being as annoyingly and cumbersome as possible.

If the companies would stop misusing data and intentionally seeking loop holes... The whole world would be a much nicer place.

Get mad at those who make these laws necessary and try to bypass them, not at the law itself.

@IntrusionCM you know, when I posted the runt, I was not really going for blaming the law. Mostly was a question about how it could came to that, obviously intention was different. And you could read it like - was it what they aimed for? No, of course not. How is it going to get to the right way?

But after your comment I started thinking in different direction and it feels like you could kinda say in advance that companies would do all they can to loophole out of it, as advertisement is so much money in the industry. Companies are not so unpredictable in that.

@str-write yeah... But if we'd be able to write perfect specs in laws that no one could misunderstood...

Oh boy. Programming would be a bliss. 🤣

@IntrusionCM well maybe some open source reference implementation would be nice

Or at least something easy like - "disable all button must be 1/3 part of screen and work at least inside 3 seconds"..

If you see the consent dialog, you are browsing it wrong.

Get some extensions and block the crap out of your browsing experience - qite literally so...

Yes.

@IntrusionCM Our tax law has that. Even diagrams!

@sbiewald *vomits*

Tax is my cryptonite... It's once a year to get money back and I'm always in a state of trauma afterwards...

There are few things that truly terrify me, but taxes and their bureaucratic shitload of questions is definitely one of them.

@srganiga no worries. The new linux kernel release has support for nuclear ovens. Now we will have cookies in no time.

Vote by your fingers and get your weather elsewhere

You do realize it doesn't take that long to not set cookies, that loader is waiting on a sleep() to make you feel bad about refusing cookies.

Frustrating you so that you give up.

The cookie law is ridiculous, and shows the complete incompetence of the politicians who passed it.

I agree with the premise, but the implementation should have been to enforce this on a *browser* level opt-in with a standard way for sites to request cookie access (the same way they request audio, webcam access at the moment.) Asking each website to do it themselves, then trusting that they'll do it effectively (or at all) is complete insanity, and anyone with the tiniest slither of technical ability would have seen that from day 1.

@AlmondSauce no one requires websites to collect data they need extra permissions for.

They have to allow you to change the settings. They have to abide by said settings.

No one said they couldn't punish you for not enabling all cookies by making you wait 6 weeks straight for the page to unlock.

@Parzi I'm pretty sure that it's illegal to punish people for exercising freedoms granted by law. We would just have to prove that they don't actually need that much time. The issue is that freedom is a matter of disposable income to pay a lawyer and go to court, so even if we did prove it nothing would happen.