[reitanqild]

This should be temporarily as it shows (IMO) an extreme misunderstanding of the GDPR:

- by default they are not allowed to collect more data than strictly necessary.

- additional collection must be opt-in, and there can be no punishment for not opting in.

- showing these dialogs that are opt-out seems like a way to beg for a fine: "We hereby declare to all our visitors that by default we collect way more information than we are allowed to."

[vsl]

But the windows aren’t opt-out (that would actually provide better UX if you don’t care, see cookie banners).

They are annoying precisely because they do comply and require explicit opt-in into tracking. In other words, they ask you to make your choice as the first interaction.

By default, they collect nothing - and immediately show the form. You are not punished for opting out and can continue the same way as those opting in.

But everybody is annoyed by being asked. Regulators perhaps expected this to be some setting hidden somewhere, but that’s so incompatible with free content business models that it was clear that won’t happen. This is the compliant consequence.

[reitanqild]

Interesting and well written, you made me think, thanks.

I do not think it us that easy to fool seasoned regulators the second time though (the first time being the cookie law).

Also:

> but that’s so incompatible with free content business models that it was clear that won’t happen.

There is no reason why they need to track me around the we to serve ads.

Im fact, given the recent accuracy of the biggest actor in that space I'd argue that you'd do significantly better in many cases by using contextual ads.