I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. I believe the way you stated this is accurate.
The regulation and its outcome was clearly not understood or intended by those who mandated it. Absolutely everyone is suffering from this.
As for the "not care", I think the primary issue is that most people don't make much effort to understand the things they use. If they understood what was going on, they would be more upset and possibly make some effort to get things changed/reverted.
I would put a bit of blame on big corporations for not spending some of their lobbying money on fighting this requirement - not because they should get a free pass at misusing our info, but because they should be well equipped to know that the regulation will be addressed in a crappy way that costs them money and annoys users.
I think it's a bit weird (but the author did the same thing) that the blame is put on regulators here for not being precise enough with language, and not companies are are happily exploiting the loophole for as long as they can. And if it does get repealed: great! companies win, tracking is back.
There seems to be a nuance missing here in most of this discussion.
The regulation and its outcome was clearly not understood or intended by those who mandated it. Absolutely everyone is suffering from this.
As for the "not care", I think the primary issue is that most people don't make much effort to understand the things they use. If they understood what was going on, they would be more upset and possibly make some effort to get things changed/reverted.
I would put a bit of blame on big corporations for not spending some of their lobbying money on fighting this requirement - not because they should get a free pass at misusing our info, but because they should be well equipped to know that the regulation will be addressed in a crappy way that costs them money and annoys users.