[iamtew]

The cookie wall won't let me continue without agreeing to cookies. I can reject them in the Cookie Policy, but that too is protected behind the cookie wall.

Obviously, this doesn't comply with the GDPR, and makes the site unreadable for some.

[isostatic]

This article loads just fine without needed any cookies, just curl it (via a US server) and load it. If that works, why do they need to set any cookies? Some sites need session cookies to maintain login details from request to request, that's fine. Some sites may offer the option to use cookies to save your login from one visit to the next, that's also fine, ask if they want that.

Most sites don't need to set any cookies though, so why bother asking permission.

[lxglv]

I would suppose, that’s not the essential functionality reuirement, rather an ad tracking one.

[isostatic]

Ahh, well in that case at least be honest.

"This site costs money, accept our cookies while we sell your personal information for a fraction of what it's worth or you can't see it. We value your personal data at 6 cents, as that's what the 300 companies we sell it to will pay us."

[jwilk]

Here's an archived copy without the nag screen:

https://archive.is/zoITD

[letsgetphysITal]

Report them to the ICO.

[proaralyst]

Or give them the benefit of the doubt and email them.

[bjl]

Do people still really believe that cases like this are the result of ignorance? It's been years since GDPR was made into law, seems to me the only explanations are severe negligence or malevolence.

[rock_hard]

Maybe some people just decided to don’t give a shit about GDPR...hard to blame them. They law (while well intended) is totally out of proportion and puts the internet in danger.

It’s insanly stupid and backwards...just like the new copyright laws the EU is working on.

Europeans are shooting themselves right back into the dark ages...and I probably wouldn’t care if they weren’t ruining it for everyone else too.

And before somebody asks: I am European

[gonvaled]

Maybe europeans are ruining it because (insert here giant US Corp) has been stealing tax revenue, and because the US gov is spying on europeans.

[rock_hard]

Your definition of stealing is a weird one. As far as I know (insert here giant US Corp) has always followed local tax laws.

I think Europeans are just being bitches about the fact that they haven’t been able to replicate Silcon Valleys success (with noteable exceptions such as Spotify, Zendesk and others which ultimately also moved their HQs to the US though).

Yes, the US spies on Europeans and everybody else, just as Europeans and the rest of the world spy on the US. It’s what nation states do...they spy on each other. You and I might not like it but it’s whats it is...no need to single out the US.

[MaxBarraclough]

Half-baked techie workaround: private browsing?

[moviuro]

private browsing with no cookies allowed = same issue :(

The "web" is so much broken with cookies disabled... (techcrunch, any 'large' news site - except the Guardian!)

[MaxBarraclough]

Sure, but I feel you're ignoring my point.

Enable cookies and use a private browsing session. The cookies disappear when you're done reading. What's lost?

[pbhjpbhj]

Users working around major internet sites who can't be bothered to comply with EU law, what's lost is convenience and Rule of Law. Sure I can put ear plugs in when every $carBrand goes past, but what's better is making cars with proper exhaust baffles.

[jgtrosh]

These wall designs are really surprising; I would expect bad designs to come from difficulty of implementing data collection management, not the wall UX. Just imagine you're a user seeing this, do you not feel antagonized?

[zeta0134]

Since the data collection management would traditionally be stored as a cookie... It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Without tracking, how do you track that consent was revoked?

The cookie law bugs me because it's feels like it's being applied in completely the wrong place. Isn't the browser perfectly capable of restricting third party cookies and presenting the necessary legal warnings?

[Fradow]

The cookie law has exemptions for cookies that are there for technical reasons. For example, your locale, and which cookies you agreed to.

The browser cannot differentiate first party cookies that are technical or for tracking.

[Cthulhu_]

^ this; people for some reason still assume all cookies are banned. If that was so, it'd be a feature removed from browsers already.

[pbhjpbhj]

Maybe we need done standardised cookies for chosen locale, and such.

[thecatspaw]

browsers can restrict third party cookies. But this is opt-out, default is to allow these. The average user is most likely not aware of these settings.

[krageon]

They're not surprising if you assume the ground state for every company that does not fear the teeth that come with this legislation is malice. They're doing the bare minimum they need to so they can pretend to think they have complied if anyone knocks on their door, while still trampling all over everyone's rights.

[mychael]

OMG, a site doesn’t comply with GDPR? Call the internet police! /s

[orcdork]

Nothing like trying to ridicule people that care about privacy, while hiding behind an "/s", huh?