[scarface_74]

Blame your government. The only thing that the 99 section/11 chapter GDPR accomplished was to make the web worse with shitty Cookie notices.

[Dylan16807]

Websites don't need notices if they're not doing anything shady or unnecessary tracking, and just about every cookie notices I see is going against either the wording or the intent of the law.

If they want to be annoying on purpose, we should blame them, not the GDPR.

[scarface_74]

So it's an effective law just not effectively enforced. Isn't that a distinction without a difference?

[Dylan16807]

I'm not saying it's effective (yet), but if companies respond to a law by doing something very obnoxious and not at all required by the law, I point my blame at the companies.

[nibbleshifter]

GDPR has proven incredibly useful to me and others in imposing cost on organisations and businesses that want to fuck about with our data.

Someone's acting the maggot? No matter where they are, they get a subject access request. Followed by a request to correct or delete data.

The ability to legally force companies to correct inaccurate data is incredibly useful.

[scarface_74]

Facebook and Google didn't announce any harm from the GDPR. There are many companies that announce lower earning expectations from a simple 5 line App Store change by Apple and a one time popup asking you whether you want to be tracked.

[nibbleshifter]

FAANG aren't who I am thinking of here - much worse are the background check and risk reporting companies such as WorldCheck that maintain dossiers on you that can often be not much more than speculative fanfiction, which banks use to assess risk.