> I did a search for “moral” in this thread’s history. I
Well that's the wrong approach. I didn't say you kept using the exact word 'immoral', I said you were talking about the "immoral yet explicitly legal practices". That doesn't mean you are using the same exact words I used generalize your various comments and position.
> That’s not “keep talking about”, that’s one mention.
No, it is “keep talking about”, because in every comment discussing who is responsible for the cookie banners, you refer to the activities that are being regulated, rather than the regulation which is what is actually relevant.
> You’re ascribing preconceived notions from the straw man in your head, not my words.
No, no strawman. Every time you try to shift the buck to blaming the companies and not the regulation, and that's what I'm responding to and calling out.
> I thus point you to those same HN guidelines
Out of a petty attempt to do so after I did it because of your snark? I haven't violated the guidelines in any of my replies, and there is no strawman here. I'm addressing your arguments and your arguments only.
> This law prescribes several ways to comply and not be annoying to people.
What method do you propose companies that want to engage in the explicitly legal activity of data collection as long as user consent is obtained obtain that user account? In a method less annoying than a cookie banner?
If you again suggest they just abstain from the explicitly legal activity of data collection as long as user consent is obtained, then you would again be trying to shift the goalposts.
> Thus if a company complies in an annoying way, it’s on them.
So what's the less annoying way than a cookie banner at the bottom of the screen to obtain consent, that doesn't rely on the goodness of the hearts of people running the corporations (because that would very surely be a very naive outlook to think that was realistic)?
> The text of the rule is on regulators, how someone engages with that text is on them.
Sure, and the cookie banners are pretty much the least annoying approach that is compliant with the regulation.
Well that's the wrong approach. I didn't say you kept using the exact word 'immoral', I said you were talking about the "immoral yet explicitly legal practices". That doesn't mean you are using the same exact words I used generalize your various comments and position.
> That’s not “keep talking about”, that’s one mention.
No, it is “keep talking about”, because in every comment discussing who is responsible for the cookie banners, you refer to the activities that are being regulated, rather than the regulation which is what is actually relevant.
> You’re ascribing preconceived notions from the straw man in your head, not my words.
No, no strawman. Every time you try to shift the buck to blaming the companies and not the regulation, and that's what I'm responding to and calling out.
> I thus point you to those same HN guidelines
Out of a petty attempt to do so after I did it because of your snark? I haven't violated the guidelines in any of my replies, and there is no strawman here. I'm addressing your arguments and your arguments only.
> This law prescribes several ways to comply and not be annoying to people.
What method do you propose companies that want to engage in the explicitly legal activity of data collection as long as user consent is obtained obtain that user account? In a method less annoying than a cookie banner?
If you again suggest they just abstain from the explicitly legal activity of data collection as long as user consent is obtained, then you would again be trying to shift the goalposts.
> Thus if a company complies in an annoying way, it’s on them.
So what's the less annoying way than a cookie banner at the bottom of the screen to obtain consent, that doesn't rely on the goodness of the hearts of people running the corporations (because that would very surely be a very naive outlook to think that was realistic)?
> The text of the rule is on regulators, how someone engages with that text is on them.
Sure, and the cookie banners are pretty much the least annoying approach that is compliant with the regulation.