Why shouldn't you allowed to track people across your own services if users consent? If they don't consent, they are free to simply not use your services. Problem solved.

There is no actual need for this law. No rights are being infringed on. Just don't use the website.

> Just don't use the website.

https://www.newsweek.com/heres-how-turn-off-tracking-faceboo... https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-stop-facebook-from-spyin... https://www.wired.com/story/ways-facebook-tracks-you-limit-i...

Because that's how we like it, and that's the end of it. The people of the EU have said that these are the rules for doing business there, and saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws" is rather irrelevant.

> saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws"

The Americans call this "stand your ground".

Well, half "touché", half "precisely".

Conversely, you can justify any authoritarian unjust law because "that's how we like it."

"Deporting brown people without due process? That's how we like it, who are you to complain? You're free to not work with the US, but we know you will!"

Obviously a nuanced and meaningful conversation goes much deeper than "that's how we like it." Why is it such an infringement on user rights to not be allowed to use a website if they don't follow the owner's terms of use? That is unaddressed.

Funny choice of example considering that it is the US that is currently deporting people without due process.

Yes, that is the precise example I used to demonstrate why "we like it that way" is not good policy. I don't get what's so funny.

Why doesnt this same logic apply to meta? They don't have to comply with this law if they don't want to, its their choice to operate in the EU

> across your own services

What are Facebook's own services? Or Google's for that matter.

Neither tracks you just when you're on facebook.com or google.com. They track you everywhere.

This logic works just the same applied to Meta, without the requiring the expectation that Meta should be able to operate without following the law.

Why shouldn't Meta be forbidden to track people? It's the law. If they don't want to follow the applicable law in the jurisdiction they operate in they can cease their operations there.