[cameronh90]

Is there anyone who actually consents for any other reason than the consent button being either to click than more options? Would we accept this kind of behavioural tracking in real life? Of course not.

Just ban tracking for advertising purposes entirely, or at the last least mandate that sites respect the do not track header and require browser manufacturers implement it as opt-in.

The cookie pop-up is a dumb law.

[jdietrich]

>Is there anyone who actually consents for any other reason than the consent button being either to click than more options?

If the "reject all" button isn't as easy to click as the "accept all" button, then the popup is illegal. The big players have all been forced into compliance, but there's a long tail of publishers who are chancing their arm on the assumption that the regulators don't have the resources to deal with everyone. That's probably a reasonable assumption in the short term, but the EU are playing the long game.

[cameronh90]

> then the popup is illegal

That's what they say, but even government websites do the same thing.

Anyway, my point wasn't so much about the pop up itself but rather that if you make it easy to reject, then everyone will reject. So what's the point of allowing it? It's like having a cashier asking everyone "would you like to get kicked in the balls?" with the hope that someone misunderstands, and then they get to kick them in the balls.

[hn92726819]

> If the "reject all" button isn't as easy to click as the "accept all" button, then the popup is illegal

You should watch the video in the linked article. The options are accept all and "customize". I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that accepting is one click and rejecting is more than one

[mrweasel]

That's still illegal, but the site operators are betting that no one cares enough to complain and report them.