How so? The law doesn't require cookie banners.
However, you could argue that tracking/advertisement cookies should have been banned completely and that the law is flawed in that it allows for tracking given user "consent".
replyI love the EU apologists - “it wasn’t a bad law just because the outcome was bad”
replyThe alternative being to bend over and grab our ankles with both hands the moment the scummy ad-tech industry requests our data?
replySorry mate, the GDPR is there for a bloody good reason; and legit companies obey the law.
The GDPR is theater. An effective privacy law would have prevented data collection in the first place. Data collected will be abused, and a cute little banner won't change this.
replyYes because of the GDPR, there aren’t still two trillion dollar+ market cap ad Tech companies.
replyBut at least we have cookie banners everywhere.
More pity to those who (for some bizarre reason) voluntarily choose to interact with those ad-tech companies.
replySo you don’t use Google and don’t have an Android phone?
replyIt was not a flawed idea, but flawed execution. The law should have mandated to adhere to the user's "do not track" setting in the browser.
replyThat being said, it was very early regulation in this field, and more recent approaches are already better, e.g., GDPR, DMA.