The EU didn't making seeking consent mandatory, they made tracking people without consent illegal (except to the extent that it's necessary for the service). These companies are perfectly able to simply not track people without displaying cookie banners.
This is simply automating the process of ignoring the request for consent to track you. The result is (legally) that the website may not track you because it did not receive affirmative consent. That really is the end goal, to stop companies from tracking consumes like this while still allowing for legitimate business deals.
I'd respect those moves grounded in the argument for a universal human right to privacy were it not for the glaring exceptions made to the EUs own security agencies and God knows what else under the national security exception.
Everyone in the industry tracking the privacy moves in GDPR acknowledges that far from improving privacy, they are intended to blunt US tech companies' success in the continent. And . . that's perfectly fine, i guess positioning it as a moral defense of privacy just doesn't sit well with me.
Everyone in the industry tracking the privacy moves in GDPR acknowledges that far from improving privacy, they are intended to blunt US tech companies' success in the continent.
No, this is by far the minority view and is held purely by people who are ignorant about the requirements and functionality of GDPR.
This is simply automating the process of ignoring the request for consent to track you. The result is (legally) that the website may not track you because it did not receive affirmative consent. That really is the end goal, to stop companies from tracking consumes like this while still allowing for legitimate business deals.