[emilfihlman]

GDPR is absolutely not the shining beacon of success. Let's review at some glaring, obvious and 100%-lets-make-this-law-shite points:

1. Application and enforcement: GDPR is 100% arbitrarily enforced, it is a "trust us, we could do no harm, trust us" law, that is extremely well suited to adding other such "trust us" laws.

2. Absolutely ridiculous overreach: on a technical level, GDPR is braindead. It applies ridiculous, stupid and unnecessary restrictions for no purpose.

3. You just added an obligatory "lol accept this or GTFO" thing to all sites.

[ahartmetz]

1. OK, so all laws that aren't consistently enforced are useless. What about copyright?

2. "For no purpose" - you know the purpose, you just pretend it has none because you don't like it.

3. No, that's explicitly forbidden.

[joshuakarjala]

3. No, you cannot serve any EU customers if there is not option to "opt out" of any unnecessary processing

[notemaker]

The reality however, after GDPR was implemented, is 95% of the time GTFO or click accept.

[Jnr]

Wait till mid 2019 when EU countries will actually start enforcing it. Unofficially there is a change period so probably no one will really be touched by it in the first year.

[13415]

...which means these sites are not GDPR compliant and might be fined heavily in future.

[Nursie]

In theory, very true.

I've noticed quite a few US sites, particularly some large news orgs, have been going the "accept this or leave" route, and some are going the "accept this or click on the entrance to our insane maze of links that will confuse you until you give up"

They are non-compliant, guess we'll see what happens.

[droithomme]

> No, you cannot serve any EU customers if there is not option to "opt out"

Josh buddy. By chance, have you spent any time at all on the internet using so-called "GDPR compliant" sites?