Krzysztof Jurewicz

The directive is plainly stupid and it causes big losses to the economy (the cost of programming cookie popups + the cost of wasted screen space + the cost of dismissing cookie popups). Yet there was little resistance from companies and from the society when it was introduced. It is nice to see that one company has stood up to this:

@KrzysiekJ fascism ?! you don't think you overreact here 🙄?

@marsxyz If the state aims to regulate how websites are displayed, interfering with web standards, customers’ needs and browser technology, with no way to opt out, then it looks like economic to me. “Everything within the state, nothing against the state, nothing outside the state” — Mussolini. I’m aware that this may look weird to some, but is there a better term for that?


I don't think fascism is about regulating consumer goods.

it is called regulationnism, nothing more, nothing less.

Not gonna say cookie law is good or bad because I don't really know, but it isn't fascism.

I mean : I drink water, so did Hitler.

@marsxyz The notion of regulationism doesn’t seem to be widespread and the totalitarian aspect of cookie law seems to fit well into fascism… We could argue that statism is a better notion, but according to Wikipedia statism means support for existence of state in any form, which doesn’t provide much meaning in this context… I’ll ask what people on the Birdsite think, maybe more thoughts will come…

@marsxyz Another candidate notions:

• interventionism;
• (generic) totalitarianism.

Sign in to participate in the conversation is a paid signup Mastodon instance funded directly by users purchasing accounts for just $5. An inexpensive alternative to free signup platforms, we impose direct economic cost on trolls who want to avoid blocks by creating many accounts. This instance will actively respond to any problematic users.