It's not a warning label, it's a request for consent which means they are legally required to ask you for permission and allow you to refuse them. Most implementations are actually violating the law by making it more difficult to refuse than accept or at least not giving the refuse option equal visual weight when they're not outright hiding it behind a bunch of extra steps.
This is different from the old "cookie banners" that were just informing you and leaving you no option but to dismiss the "warning". The GDPR and ePrivacy directive require companies to justify their use of your data and the only justification mechanism applicable for most of the data they want to collect is consent which must by definition be voluntary - the limitations of which are defined fairly explicitly in those laws.
Some sites try to work around this because they need ads for monetization by offering a paid subscription or requiring you to accept (behavioral) ads - but they've also been dinged for trying to bundle all the stuff not related to showing you ads with the "accept ads" option (or not letting you buy a subscription without first having to agree to share all your data like before).
I'm always surprised how many people in technical spaces like HN seem to misunderstand the legal situation and why these "warnings" look the way they do and blame the laws rather than the companies desperately trying to trick users into giving up on their data in ways that barely pass at an attempt to comply with the laws they're spending so much energy on deliberately violating. But it shouldn't be surprising - these companies put a lot of energy into making the process unpleasant for users (often in ways that are blatantly violating the laws) while framing themselves as the victims.
This is different from the old "cookie banners" that were just informing you and leaving you no option but to dismiss the "warning". The GDPR and ePrivacy directive require companies to justify their use of your data and the only justification mechanism applicable for most of the data they want to collect is consent which must by definition be voluntary - the limitations of which are defined fairly explicitly in those laws.
Some sites try to work around this because they need ads for monetization by offering a paid subscription or requiring you to accept (behavioral) ads - but they've also been dinged for trying to bundle all the stuff not related to showing you ads with the "accept ads" option (or not letting you buy a subscription without first having to agree to share all your data like before).
I'm always surprised how many people in technical spaces like HN seem to misunderstand the legal situation and why these "warnings" look the way they do and blame the laws rather than the companies desperately trying to trick users into giving up on their data in ways that barely pass at an attempt to comply with the laws they're spending so much energy on deliberately violating. But it shouldn't be surprising - these companies put a lot of energy into making the process unpleasant for users (often in ways that are blatantly violating the laws) while framing themselves as the victims.