zlacker

My recollection is that at least some country's regulators have said that if you offer option A you must also offer option A': continue for free without tracking and profiling.

Their reasoning was that GDPR says that consent must be freely given. If the site provides more service if you consent than the consent is not freely given according to those regulators.

(It seemed kind of goofy to me. In every other context I can think of consenting to something that you do not like in exchange for getting something that you want is usually considered to be freely given consent unless that something you want is something that is necessary).

>>tzs+(OP)
As I posted in another comment, German regulators apparently okayed this.

>>tzs+(OP)
If what you're describing is free consent, then what does non-free consent look like?

>>xigoi+Xr
The current solution at facebook: You will be tracked.

>>Semaph+9D
That's not non-free consent, that's not consent at all.

>>xigoi+Xr
"Look at these ads or I will hit you with a hammer"

>>xigoi+RD
You can not use it. That’s the logic here, that for free consent, a workable alternative has to exist, and some regulators say that "paying" is one, while "not using the biggest social network in the western world" is not.