Sure, if we're really lucky that'll be implemented before 2030 and maybe a handful of us will still be alive to see the day most of the mainstream web actually gets rid of all their obnoxious dialogs :)
It is great to see but I'm also happy if we can have even half a solution like this in the meantime.
The entire thing has been performative regulation.
Did asking honest businesses to restrict how they use cookies protect users from invasive tracking? Nope. Data brokers simply employed other methods or bent the "legitimate interest" exception.
Did all websites provide a single button to reject tracking, with equal prominence and proximity to the accept button? Years on this is still rare, despite being the rule.
Did data brokers find new ways to obtain the same data? Sure did and more.
Was the end result a disproportionate burden on users, including those not even in the EU, while not delivering the intended benefit. Sure is.
Do entire websites, particularly those in the USA, simply geo-block all EU countries. Yep.
Did European-based services and news websites switch to a "let us track you or pay now" model. Yes.
Did data brokers exploit the EU's inability to police the matter by incorporating dark patterns, artificial pauses, and obnoxiously long lists to stymmie user's attempts at refusing tracking? Yep.
Did bad actors ignore the regulations. Yep. Was the EU toothless to stop that? Also yes.
So what did happen?
Instead developers of web browsers incorporated anti-fingerprinting technologies to negate the problem, a part of browser development that continues to be an on-going arms race.
Actually not true, the regulation (eprivacy directive /pecr in uk) applies to all trackers including cookies, pixels, scripts,etc. if you can do with only “strictly necessary” across those then youre right.
Also consider visitors are used to these prompts, without one they may wonder: does this site follow the law?
This reminds me of ssl certs: you can pay for a basic cert or one with identity verification. Most users don’t check identity verification but its super important. To prevent scams, not security per se. Twitter doesn’t even offer an id verification service: maybe for $50/yr they should confirm who the poster is and forbid imposters from poaching your name.
unfortuantely lots of messages are not marketing and in some cases companies have legal duties to send them. My German bank insists on notifying me that I have a message. They can’t send the actual message (for security reasons), and I can’t opt out because they have a duty to inform me. Infuriating but seems to fall within the legal framework :(
I tried but to no avail. My German is very basic which makes things even harder. From what I recall they have a legal duty to notify me, and email is an acceptable form of notification, and that’s about it. I ended up using a unique email address and then let it bounce, but not sure it’s the wisest thing(?). I don’t actually need any emails from my bank, so thought it was an ok solution, but not great.
This service will log in to your bank on your behalf to scrape the site, since not all banks have APIs. This means they will store your bank login and password somewhere. Store in a way that they can decrypt it so they ... you know ... can login on your behalf occasionally to scape the latest data. If they can decrypt it, so can whoever steals their database.
I don’t have a super fancy smoker. Just one of those barrel
Smokers.
I take an old comforter and wrap the smoker in it once the meat is on. Just serves to somewhat insulate but mostly hold a lot of the smoke. With nothing on it, things on the lower rack would hardly get a good “Smokey” flavor. The blanket makes a surprisingly good addition.
But do you want to pay for their learning curve? More competitors is only helpful if the price goes down or more products are available. If prices go up as a result the consumer pays.
Yes, I do. I could move to China any moment I wanted, if I wanted to live in an economy where the people who were previously in power remain in power and get nice things and promise everything works out in your favor.
I plan to live and purchase products for at least half a century more. In that time, it is pretty unlikely that Amazon will continue to be better than competitors, in much the same way that Sears-Roebuck isn't better than competitors today. I would like there to be good competitors, on a level playing field, as fast as possible.
In other words - the choice is between short-term inefficiencies and long-term inefficiencies. It seems fairly clear that it's better to have short-term inefficiencies.
Is there any difference between Amazon, Target, Walmart, Home Depot, Lowes, Staples, Best Buy, Costco, etc?
Amazon is better for small electronics and other knick knacks, and has an aliexpress with 2 day shipping bolted on, but I do not understand the fear of Amazon retail.
All the other stores have better pricing, product curation, and local availability. They all ship to you in the same time Amazon does.
If anything, having Amazon retail as a competitor to these other retail stores gives customers one more option.
