The only thing I've noticed is even more website popups about cookies that make it hard to anything but give the go-ahead to all the cookies, but I'm not sure whether that is a result of GDPR.

That's pre-GDPR (barely), and the original idea was that users should be able to opt out of cookie tracking. But instead most web sites just added that super-annoying (particularly when it covers the whole page) pop-up giving you one option: Accept cookies or else. That was not the intention of the regulation at all. So far I've seen only a single web site that actually gave you the option to not use cookies (yes/no, not just yes).

I’ve seen a lot that give you yes/no options. Some of them tell you that you can’t use the site, sorry, when you click no, but I’ve noticed many let me continue on anyway.

Of course, I’ve seen even more that give you only an accept option... that, or as sibling commenter said yes/wilderness of options.

I ran across one the other day where the options were yes, and yes worded a little bit differently

Yes, it's normally websites run by "good people" (some non-commercial organisation) that let you easily say yes/no. Media websites implement the dark pattern of Yes/[wilderness of options page].

This is pre-GDPR, but it feels like since GDPR there's been a real uptick in this.

I suspect that this is mostly the results of the all or nothing being the easier to implement solution. I've seen several websites that do a offer a more advanced tool where you can opt-out of some cookies (3rd party tracking mostly) but still use the main site.

now you should be free and bold to click the disagree / refuse / no-cookies button and get the experience you expect.

because if the tracking/ad/shit/any cookies are not fundamentally required for the page to show, then denying you the usage of the site is a violation of your privacy (because you can't give selective consent to specific data uses)

sure, a lot of sites throw up the ugly banner, but now you can click fuck cookies, because fuck cookies if you only want to read a fucking HTML page with pictures. they can still make stats about your visit and aggregate them, but tracking cookies are absurd. (they can filter out repeated visits by looking at IP addresses and browser fingerprinting and/or they can ask you nicely to help them get better stats, but now they have to unbundle that from the ad tracking purpose.)

>now you should be free and bold to click the disagree / refuse / no-cookies button and get the experience you expect.

This button doesn't exist in 90% of cases. Websites tend to dump you into a complex, deliberately tedious to edit options UI rather than providing a "No" button.

The operative word is should. The GDPR does not allow that kind of asymmetry.

yeah, then those sites are not compliant at all. just yesterday on a news site there was just an accept button. it was sort of cute, that it was very stark colored floating on the bottom of the page, so it allowed the reader to view the article, but there was no refuse option. (at least for my browsing sample these are becoming a rarity.)

It’s too early to say how GDPR has impacted the landscape as no significant enforcement has happened.

Their are major complaints outstanding against Google, Facebook & the IAB that will define how online publishers can be funded once they are litigated.