[tbrownaw]

> because Colorado (or more likely, a large donation by those 7.4 trillion dollars) decided that an opt-out cannot be the default.

A setting left at the default value does not indicate that a person has taken action to express a preference.

It's not a bad thing, or proof of bribery or regulatory capture or whatever, if some jurisdictions decide to formally recognize this reality.

> The stupidest thing is that Google actually got in trouble for trying to restrict third party cookies by default. The UK competition watchdog agreed with advertising companies that Google making such a decision would be abuse of power and bad for competition.

From what I recall, Google was trying to grant themselves a unique privileged position where Google and Google alone would be able to track individuals across sites.