There is noting wrong with tracking (indeed, it is essential for some services), provided it is done fairly with a clear opt-in.
> but the current cost is too high.
If you think the cost of providing informed consent (!) is "too high", them I'm afraid we live on different planets.
If you don't like being constantly nagged to provide informed consent, then direct your ire to the scummy add-tech industry who are parasites on the web. One can serve up advertising without needing to invade a users privacy.
> There is noting wrong with tracking
But then you turn around and describe tracking as "scummy," "parasites," and "invading privacy."
Again, I would find it less objectionable to just make tracking illegal than this "informed consent" bullshit (which is mostly not actually informed consent because no one wants to spend the time to be informed about every fricking decision here, it's just a website).
I assume reading comprehension isn't your strong point!
I described the ad-tech industry in those terms. Not genuine services who need to use my personal data and to whom I grant informed opt-in permission!
I'm genuinely puzzled why this (and the GDPR principles in general) appears to be an alien concept to many who should know better.
Frankly, users don't want control at all costs, where that cost is "make the entire web really annoying." Either ban tracking or don't, but the current cost is too high.