On 02/06/2021 19:43, Tim Streater wrote:
On 02 Jun 2021 at 15:38:45 BST, TimW wrote:

On 02/06/2021 11:47, R D S wrote:
"I'm afraid I can't discuss the order with you sir, I would have to talk
to Mrs...."

I'd called Aldi,
To let them know they've not sent a battery/charger with the cordless
mower.

Bureaucracy has gone too far hasn't it?

GDPR serves a very useful purpose, there is a genuine need for such
legislation but it was a poorly drafted in a number of ways and is
widely misunderstood and abused, often used as an excuse for
officiousness and intransigence. The UK government should have adapted
the EU regulations to make them more sensible, but it didn't. I wonder
why not?

In the UK, everything is legal except that which is forbidden by law. On the
continent, with their fundamentally different approach, the reverse is true.
So, the EU might pass a Directive saying "You may use red-coloured tiles on
your house". Nothing more is needed in continental countries because all other
colours would be automatically forbidden. Translated as-is into UK law, such a
Directive would be a no-op because it wouldn't forbid anything. So the law
that actually would be passed here would need to include an *addition*,
stating explicitly that all other colours were forbidden. Some people then
call that gold-plating, when in fact it is necessary in order to implement the
actual purpose of the Directive.

Since I don't know what the actual purpose of GDPR was, it's hard to know
whether its implementation into UK law was done well or not. Or whether the
EU's original offfering was good/bad/indifferent or not, or
self-contradictory, unclear, or vague, or not.

It's ****ing irritating, I know that. Every damn website I go to bores me with
**** relating to cookies. Since I have no intention of allowing-all, I have to
interact with each of these, what a waste of time. In addition I sometimes
find that I'm on one page of a website, deal with the cookie ****e, then go to
another page which is part of the same organisation, only to find that they
want to bore me too. Or there's the BBC, which even if I answer their
question, decide a week or two later to ask it again.

At the time the UK implemented GDPR, we were still in the EU so had no option
to "adapt the EU regulations to make them more sensible", as you wittily put
it. Of course, now we're out, it might be possible to do something.

What ****es me off is the 'cookies needed to ensure site operation'

You don't in general, need cookies to ensure site operation.

The only purpose of cookies is to 'remember you by past actions' and so on.

Only if you have logged into a site should that be legally permitted.





--
€œwhen things get difficult you just have to lie€�

€• Jean Claud Jüncker