It seems like US institutions like to take a big player, make a huge case and then hope everyone else is scared enough to follow. In EU on the other hand the first inquiry would be validate the practices, allow corrections and if they aren't timely start stepping up the fines.
In the end you end up with the huge cases like for example the browsers or Apple tax payment and by that time you have a law with regulations and previous judgements to stand on creating a system that's hopefully understandable and easy enough to follow for the regular user with good intentions.
This is a big improvement - there is a sense of companies going from hoovering up every PI data point they could, to treating PI as a liability. That's a big deal.
I mean seriously. If the GDPR had any teeth, the companies that do this shit would be made to suffer. But since all they do is make us suffer and the EU dgaf I wonder what the point is. It's just so much privacy theatre.
Maybe there's a shift somewhere. But I can't feel it as a user.
See e.g. [1] and [2].
Is it perfect? No. But these kind of things don't change overnight.
[1]: https://www.zdnet.com/article/guess-what-gdpr-enforcement-is...
Nice! I was entirely wrong about what I thought would happen. If I were starting up I'd probably ignore building the entire framework to start with and deal with it when I have to.
https://www.enforcementtracker.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDPR_fines_and_notices
If not, you can go to the data agency of the hosting provider's country and lodge in a formal complaint that can lead to an actual investigation and fine. It really works!