Yeah, that kinda dark pattern / malicious compliance junk ought to be straight up illegal. At least on par with "contempt of court" type situations. Sure, they may (just barely) comply with the absolute letter of the law, but the spirit of the law is surely being very much abused and deeply disrespected there.
It is illegal.
> To comply with the regulations governing cookies under the GDPR and the ePrivacy Directive you must:
> [...]
> - Allow users to access your service even if they refuse to allow the use of certain cookies
> - Make it as easy for users to withdraw their consent as it was for them to give their consent in the first place.
7 clicks is not as easy as one "accept all", violating the last point. Not allowing you to dismiss the banner and access the site violates the other point.
The real problem is enforcement, unfortunately.
It is not malicious compliance
It is not complying to the law
Law clearly states how the reject path should look and they are NOT in compliance, just nobody sued them yet
There is no mention of the usual enshittyfication, instead their complaint is that things look generic and that is the last of the list. I would say this is a feature.
The points about locking and dumbing down products are well researched, true and worrisome.
I’ve bought a NAS after watching NASCompares a few years ago, and also an ethernet adapter. His videos are nice. Talking about enshittyfication on an enshittyfied site misses the mark a little bit. “Legitimate interest”… lol.
I also use, 'Cookie Auto-Delete', which deletes a sites cookies as soon as I close the tab, unless I specify to keep them, which I do on sites I want to remain logged into.
It surprises me people put up with these annoyances, or ads either.
Using uBlock Origin with cookie consent modal filters is way better (but causes breakage at times).