... All so I can have ads that are actually more relevant to me.

Sounds horrible. >..<

The (...fortunately a) handful of places I've worked at which dealt with this sort of thing were very strict about removing PII.

I'm more concerned about only being shown information (not just ads for products) relevant to my click-tuned interests as I think that's just contributing massively to political polarization.

That’s a defeatist post hoc rationalisation, akin to ”I don’t have anything to hide”

The cookie thing is just a red herring. Who gives a damn about cookies? Are they suddenly a privacy problem after decades in use? The people who want to track you (including these crooked governments who are pretending to care about cookies) are doing much more than using cookies these days. Which is exactly why they felt it safe to raise this giant kerfuffle about cookies. It's a distraction.

The EU, the same people that decided Windows shipping a default browser was an issue about a decade after it had actually stopped being one.

Cookies have always been a privacy problem. That other, greater privacy invasions exist does not mean that cookies ought not be addressed or ought be tolerated.

Liberty demands the end of systems of control.

Liberty had better start polishing its musket and sharpening its sword.

I'll partially acknowledge this point (nice move btw) but frankly, if I MUST see ads, being shown ads that would at least target my demographic is at least more interesting to me. For example, I often get shown stuff that only nerds would like, and being one, at minimum I smile sometimes, even if I don't click on it

Indeed. I challenge all bored-enough readers to an exercise: compare your doomscroll to your friend's doomscroll. It's wild how much they can differ.

Maybe I'm unique in this experience, but the "actually more relevant to me" part is just never true. Most of the ads I see that are delivered via these auctions are just garbage or scams or "relevant" in a tenuous pointless way.

The only really relevant ads I've seen are from blogs that literally just sell ad space to brands and the ad is just a simple image link you can click on. Philosophy blog? Philosophy book ad. High end men's clothing blog? High end men's clothing brand ad.

Or "relevant" in the sense that it's something I bought recently: I searched for vacuum cleaners, found one I liked an bought it. Now I will be seeing ads for vacuum cleaners for the next few months.

I get hyper-targeted ads trying to sell me electrical distribution equipment and air handling units because I run commercial electrical work (mostly mechanical equipment focused) and search for a lot of equipment part numbers. They’re on target, but ineffective.

None of the ads could ever be effective, I have my supply houses that I buy from and they don’t advertise online.

I do have a decent amount of buying power at work (single digit millions a year) but no internet ad from an electrical distributor is ever going to influence my purchasing decision.

The really funny ones are when you buy something online then receive a deluge of ads for the thing you just purchased

I would love for an audit of sites to see if any popular sites still do collect the data when you click no. Or if you just land on the banner page, and close the tab.

Or if you just ignore the pop-up through ublock's element picker or something else equivalent and continue to use the webpage.

As far as I'm concerned, that doesn't constitutes consenting to anything whatsoever.

Stack Overflow has dozens of domains and each of them has the dumb cookie popup.. I set up a Ublock rule and modify it for (iirc) all sites, so I don't see the element with the ID on any site (I think it has the term "stack" in the id/class name). Ah, bliss!