It is impossible to go anywhere in a technology space online without hitting a wave of commentary about how stupid GDPR is. It was written by bureaucrats who don’t understand the amazing potential of unrestricted technology. These US-based critiques almost always lean on the oldest trick in cyberlibertarianism: we don’t have time to regulate, we must simply adapt and ride the wave. Nobody has time for government.

Of all GDPR’s consequences, none gets more attention than the cookie banner, which critics present as the inevitable result of government meddling. Blaming GDPR for the cookie banner is like blaming the health inspector for the roaches. The banner is deliberate vandalism, a dark pattern engineered to exhaust you before you can learn anything about the surveillance apparatus humming behind the “OK.” Ironically the banner designed to hide the machine has taught the public more about the machine than a thousand podcasts ever will. Even non-technical people stop at “your data is shared with 996 partners.”

↫ Mat Duggan

There is so much misinformation about the cookie banner, it’s honestly quite hard to believe it’s not deliberately spread. You don’t need a cookie banner for functional cookies, so as long as you don’t share your users’ data with anyone else, you don’t need a cookie banner at all. On top of that, most cookie banners you encounter are actually not compliant with the GDPR at all, because they don’t present a single-click option to block your data from being shared with those 996 partners.

What the cookie banner has done is inform millions – maybe even billions – of people the world over of just how insipid the online advertising and data harvesting industry really is. It put the issue on the map, and by now, everyone, no matter their level of computer literacy, is fully aware of what’s happening to their data every time they see one of these (non-compliant) banners. No else had the guts to do this – except for the European Union.

The wider GPDR has set the baseline for online privacy protections, and while we have a long way to go before we’ve fully solved this issue, the EU at least gave us a good point to jump off from. Smoking and asbestos weren’t banned in a day, either.

A few months ago, Google announced it was going to put Android on laptops (and eventually, desktops), serving as eventual replacements for Chromebooks. Unlike those, though, these new Android laptops wouldn’t be low-quality, cheap, underpowered devices for school children to spill milk on, but devices actually competitive with Windows and macOS laptops. Today, the company finally allowed the press to use these new things.

Google describes Googlebook as a “totally fresh approach to computing,” bringing together Android, ChromeOS, Gemini, and premium laptop hardware from major manufacturers.

The idea is to create a laptop that feels more natural to use for Android phone users while retaining what makes a desktop OS useful, such as a full Chrome browser, desktop apps, a proper file manager, Linux support, and a full terminal environment.

Google is also trying to solve some of the biggest problems Android users have had when moving between their phone and laptop, and make the two devices feel like part of the same ecosystem.

↫ Adamya Sharma at Android Authority

I’ve been looking at some of the videos of people using and playing with these new Android laptops, and to be honest, I’m not impressed. I’m seeing quite a bit of jank, a complete lack of consistency, and apparently, a lack of Android applications optimised for desktop use. The close integration with your Android phone are nice, but of course, this also means another dollop of slimy lock-in, as I highly doubt Google will make it easy or even possible at all for, say, iPhones or other platforms to integrate quite as nicely as Android devices will.

Worse yet, there’s the elephant in the room: for just how long will Google care about this new platform? These laptops start at $900 and go all the way up to $1300 (and will be considerably more expensive here in Europe), which is a lot to ask for something Google might get bored of and abandon in a few years’ time. Ten or more years ago, in a slightly more innocent time, I might’ve been excited about Google bringing Android to laptops and desktops, but in 2026, I just can’t be bothered to care.

Also, and this doesn’t really matter, but “Googlebook OS”?

The GIMP will never magically become software beloved by artists—not without radically changing its culture, and making the artists the ones who call the shots. The GIMP will remain what it has always set out to be: a tinkerer’s toolbox, more concerned with the purity of its software politics than with garnering a loyal userbase of photographers and designers.

But because everyone insisted to poise it as a viable Photoshop killer, Linux is left with an obvious hole in its software offering, a hole nobody managed to fill with their own challenger.

↫ Aria Salvatrice

Excellent article, and spot-on conclusion.