[debugnik]

> Deny on the other hand causes the same question to come up again and again.

Not in my experience. I click deny almost everywhere, even if it takes more clicks, but rarely do I see the banners come up again in a second visit. Tracking my choice is a functional cookie after all.

I do, however, simply close the tab when the banner occupies half the window (or I use reader mode to bypass it altogether). That's just obnoxious.

[Silhouette]

So they only pop up every time if you force them to respect your decision by not letting them store persistent cookies in the first place? To avoid the recurring interruptions all you have to do is trust the organisation that's employing this user-hostile pattern in the first place to respect your wishes and not be user-hostile more discreetly instead?

I'll tell you what is a one time deal: the explicit do not track preference that my browser automatically sends to every site I visit. They already know they don't need to bother asking me about these things every time. They just choose to overlook it.

[samtho]

It is my understanding that GDPR and CCPA both specify that consent is only needed for non-essential cookies (or some nebulous term they use) and you can make the argument that storing user preferences are essential. The laws in question don’t, however, have as strong language for the reverse case, i.e. you can ask for consent for cookies that may be considered essential and thus forbid yourself from storing the preference to deny resulting in harassment.

[dizhn]

I was talking about devices mostly. The worst offender I know of is google and Android. I think they just settled of court in a similar matter.

[debugnik]

Oh that I fully agree; sorry, I was only thinking cookies. I too have got Android devices with built-in crapware that ask for permissions and ad tracking again and again because I keep tapping "no". Chinese brands are the worst at this, even the damned built-in file manager has ads.