Those two are linked fundamentally - even medieval and ancient rulers hardly what we would call enlightened knew that making unenforcible laws only breed contempt.
When they can set up anywhere and access everywhere it is asking to be flouted. Geolocated financial intergration is about the only area they can start to touch with enforcement. Without that they have about as much sway as a backwater dictatorship writing hate mail threatening arrest to every first world newspaper which refers to him as a dictator. Right or wrong morally they just look stupid and delusional.
The law isn't unenforceable. The law is unenforced.
The reason it is unenforced is that the agencies that seem to have the responsibility to do so are understaffed and afraid of the drawn out litigation and political backlash.
A ruling that some of these dark patterns are valid would be a disaster to the people trying to enforce these laws, so undoubtedly they're trying to build a watertight case to prove them invalid - knowing that the companies they're trying to enforce against have ridiculous amounts of funding and entire businesses will fall if the enforcers win.
All this on top of the larger concerns in the GDPR - for example, companies that, once they've collected data for one purpose, proceed to process it for another purpose without any legal basis at all.
When they can set up anywhere and access everywhere it is asking to be flouted. Geolocated financial intergration is about the only area they can start to touch with enforcement. Without that they have about as much sway as a backwater dictatorship writing hate mail threatening arrest to every first world newspaper which refers to him as a dictator. Right or wrong morally they just look stupid and delusional.