“Many internet users mistake this annoying situation as a direct outcome of the GDPR, when in fact companies misuse designs in violation of the law. The GDPR demands a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’, as reasonable people would expect, but companies often have the power over the design and narrative when implementing the GDPR.”
Missed this a couple of weeks ago, and it could make a huge difference to our browsing experiences (and compel sites to do better!)
Note: the misuse and overuse of “crazy” is unfortunate in the linked site. The Self Defined dictionary recommends more appropriate, and less ableist, alternative words: https://www.selfdefined.app/definitions/crazy/
@laura that's a great initiative! The other really annoying thing I've seen is the ever-increasing length of "legitimate interest" or "essential cookies" back to square one. I'd like to see this class of weaselling eliminated entirely but I can't imagine how one crafts a law in such a way that it's useful in the long term.
But "thou shalt not track" comes to mind as a guiding principle. Surveillance Capitalism needs to go.
@laura a tangential, if only minor, consequence of cookie banner abuse is that we are made aware of the literal hundreds of data vampires (sorry, « partners ») that populate the depths of each of those websites.
@laura One could expose the internet user's mistakes, or boost the good intentions of others. But the reality is that most of the damage done by Big Tech is through their lobbying and interference with law makers. This is done in secret and when the public later gets to know about some of it, it is always (far) too late to do something about it. The problem with Big Tech is very, very structural.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!