[iamtew]

The cookie wall won't let me continue without agreeing to cookies. I can reject them in the Cookie Policy, but that too is protected behind the cookie wall.

Obviously, this doesn't comply with the GDPR, and makes the site unreadable for some.

[isostatic]

This article loads just fine without needed any cookies, just curl it (via a US server) and load it. If that works, why do they need to set any cookies? Some sites need session cookies to maintain login details from request to request, that's fine. Some sites may offer the option to use cookies to save your login from one visit to the next, that's also fine, ask if they want that.

Most sites don't need to set any cookies though, so why bother asking permission.

[lxglv]

I would suppose, that’s not the essential functionality reuirement, rather an ad tracking one.

[jwilk]

Here's an archived copy without the nag screen:

https://archive.is/zoITD

[letsgetphysITal]

Report them to the ICO.

[proaralyst]

Or give them the benefit of the doubt and email them.

[MaxBarraclough]

Half-baked techie workaround: private browsing?

[moviuro]

private browsing with no cookies allowed = same issue :(

The "web" is so much broken with cookies disabled... (techcrunch, any 'large' news site - except the Guardian!)

[jgtrosh]

These wall designs are really surprising; I would expect bad designs to come from difficulty of implementing data collection management, not the wall UX. Just imagine you're a user seeing this, do you not feel antagonized?

[zeta0134]

Since the data collection management would traditionally be stored as a cookie... It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Without tracking, how do you track that consent was revoked?

The cookie law bugs me because it's feels like it's being applied in completely the wrong place. Isn't the browser perfectly capable of restricting third party cookies and presenting the necessary legal warnings?

[krageon]

They're not surprising if you assume the ground state for every company that does not fear the teeth that come with this legislation is malice. They're doing the bare minimum they need to so they can pretend to think they have complied if anyone knocks on their door, while still trampling all over everyone's rights.

[mychael]

OMG, a site doesn’t comply with GDPR? Call the internet police! /s

[orcdork]

Nothing like trying to ridicule people that care about privacy, while hiding behind an "/s", huh?