71–80 of 192 posts
Maybe the blocked content is just divine retribution for the abhorrent cookie consent buttons we all have to press 20 times a day now.
Lawmakers and voters sometimes act as if regulations are free. They think “wouldn’t it be nice” and pass on the costs to businesses. They aren’t in fact free.
* "local American media" WTF. Almost all of you are large corporates.
I’m the opposite: I grew up in Europe but live in the States. There’s a ton of European websites and content I can’t access from here. While this may suck for you personally I don’t think American companies (especially local news companies) should have to comply with invasive and expensive European privacy laws. Especially after forcing the entire world to adopt useless and annoying cookie walls. If you really want t…
I’m the opposite: I grew up in Europe but live in the States. There’s a ton of European websites and content I can’t access from here. While this may suck for you personally I don’t think American companies (especially local news companies) should have to comply with invasive and expensive European privacy laws. Especially after forcing the entire world to adopt useless and annoying cookie walls. If you really want t…
> At the bottom of each page: https://www.nexstar.tv>
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not really offended that I can't see all content from Europe, but the idiotic newspeak like "Our European visitors are important to us." is almost offensive. I don't see why they aren't just honest.
Toxic positivity. It's a pervasive feature of American culture.
Jeez, what a mess. To extend the McDonald’s analogy, when McDonald’s is serving its American customers, it doesn’t heed European laws about beef and potatoes. Because those laws are irrelevant to them, they have no bearing on McDonald’s making money (again in the context of serving their American customers). McDonald’s is never going to check what Brussels says about dairy before they make a milkshake in Spokane. Sor…
I don't understand completely why you're being downvoted. I'm european, in favour of GDPR, and I think this is a valid way of doing it. These reactions confuse me the same as using incognito or adblockers to pass paywalls and such - if that's their business model and their choice, I'm going to say no, and won't even be interested.
Because it's irrelevant, wrong and passive-aggressive belligerent: "Sorry you all didn’t get the consequences you wanted... childish ... Zero thinking ... churlishness".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This: > McDonald’s is never going to check what Brussels says about dairy before they make a milkshake in Spokane. Sorry. conflicts with this: > law is introduced, business figures out the easiest way to deal with it and get back to what they were doing, rinse and repeat. So which is it? If they care about Brussels, then they are willing to go the extra mile. If they don't care, why put up the block anyways?
Most companies (and most individuals, I'd say) want to do what's necessary to not be bothered. It's doubtful these organizations have any great fear of EU regulatory bodies, but if showing a warning (that the user can subsequently bypass) shows they made an effort and staves off 90% of complaints, it'll be worth it.
> Our European visitors are important to us.
> This site is currently unavailable to visitors from the European Economic Area while we work to ensure your data is protected in accordance with applicable EU laws.
“We care about your privacy.” is also a real joker. Those boxes often provide no “opt-out all” button and force you to “object” to “legitimate interests” one-by-one even if you do “opt-out”.
How GDPR is implemented is a total shitshow. It clearly says that it's an OPT-IN, not opt-out and one has to uncheck everything one by one. We're creating a fucking dystopia just to click on more ads.
It‘s such an abhorrent marketing style of talking. "Your life is important to us. Therefore we must kill you.“