Laws should be enforceable, but at some point "it's a bad law if it can be bypassed with corruption" just completely surrenders any hope of holding powerful people / companies accountable to anything at all.

That's a very absolute outlook. The fact is that they were very naive and, althoug they seem to be adjusting, it's been painfully slow and the harm has been done and the public is suffering meanwhile.

Law making is a way of predicting the future and setting up incentives to achieve a goal. You need to foresee what can go wrong, talk to incumbents and anticipate the response. It's a technical matter and this has been a debacle.

It's useless to put the blame in the advertisers. Even if they're evil, that doesn't make the situation any better for the public.

> The fact is that they were very naive and, althoug they seem to be adjusting

Who are "they"? The law hasn't changed, it's enforcement that is changing, albeit very slowly.

There are so many institutions that can be rightfully blamed - chiefly the DPAs and the national governments, but your continued insistence on blaming the lawmakers makes no sense. The law is clear, it's just not being enforced.

Of course advertisers deserve all this blame too, but their blame is irrelevant when discussing enforcement. I don't expect them to stop any more than I expect a serial killer to turn themselves in. This is still a failure of the institutions.

Well almost all websites in France do the legal thing now with an obvious "decline all" button, which was not the case at first.

It took just a pair of ruling that made it clear this illegal pattern was going to actually be cracked down upon, and now these popups are just a small annoyance rather than the absolutely enraging trap that they were at first.

Of course I still wish they were unnecessary, but they serve as a reminder that these websites are still trying to prey upon their visitors.

> now these popups are just a small annoyance rather than the absolutely enraging trap

Disagree. The popup is the enraging problem. It's not a small annoyance. I click them multiple times every single day and it's ludicrous.

I don't need a "reminder". The last thing I want is some "reminder" day after day after day. I want a law that protects consumers in the first place.

> Disagree. The popup is the enraging problem. It's not a small annoyance. I click them multiple times every single day and it's ludicrous.

Then don't visit webpages that do illegal things and are hostile to their users.

> I want a law that protects consumers in the first place.

This is that law.

That's like saying "don't visit places where people get murdered if you don't want to get murdered."

How about you just enforce consumer protections for everyone? Because that is clearly not the law.

> That's like saying "don't visit places where people get murdered if you don't want to get murdered."

Nope. Murder is an action after which the victim can not make any more actions. It would be like saying "don't go to the bakery where they spit in your food and slap you in the face every time you order something". You are enraged by the behavior of the websites you visit and you still keep going there every day. Either you are a masochist or "voting with your wallet" or, in this instance with you attention, doesn't really work. Why do you give your attention to those that treat you like shit?

> How about you just enforce consumer protections for everyone?

They are. What gave you the idea they aren't? Because some pages still behave illegally? You understand that murder still happens?

> Because that is clearly not the law.

Do you know anything about GDPR? Because it seems that you do not. Could you point to the text of the regulation that you object to? I'll wait but I'm sure I'll be waiting for godot here.

> Murder is an action after which the victim can not make any more actions.

What does that have to do with anything? I think you missed my point.

> Why do you give your attention to those that treat you like shit?

Because I have no choice. Every website has these damned popups. Where am I supposed to get my news from otherwise? I mean, what internet do you use...?

> They are. What gave you the idea they aren't?

Because sites are still allowed to track me? Why bother with consent around tracking? Just make it illegal to begin with.

> Do you know anything about GDPR? Because it seems that you do not.

That's inappropriate for HN. Please see the guidelines. Assume good faith.

How do we help honest websites that avoid tracking compete better?

I agree. These websites should just not spy on me and therefore not have a pop-up.

But in the absence of that? I appreciate at least being asked for my consent so that I can press the "I do not consent to being tracked" button. It shouldn't exist in the first place, but since these websites are unwilling to just not spy on people, this seems like the next best thing.

Maybe take some responsibility and stop visiting websites that don't respect your privacy? At least now you are informed about which websites don't.

Lawmakers should have a limit on the number of laws they can write. Say it's 100. They can regulate 100 things, so they need to consider importance. If they want to regulate something new, they have to give up something else. Which one is more important?

The vast majority of laws are never enforced, so in practice this isn't as absurd as it sounds. It would make people consider what laws they spend time writing.

Agreed. Since ignorance of the law is not an excuse for violating the law we must keep the law small enough so people can actually understand it.