This is yet again a misunderstanding of the GDPR thanks to the tons of bad advice around it.
The GDPR requires consent for tracking technologies for non-essential purposes. It can be cookies, but is not limited to them. Local storage or browser fingerprinting fits the bill as well.
Moving the cookie consent management into the browser won't fulfill the intent of the law - sure, cookies are now disabled by the browser, but what about fingerprinting or server logs? A compliant site will still need to ask for consent for those.
When it comes to user experience, the regulation explicitly sets rules around how you ask for consent. Consent should be freely given so that users are not forced to opt-in (you can't force them to accept, so cookie popups where opting out is not possible or "by using this site you agree to our use of cookies" notices are not compliant). Tracking should also be opt-in, so pre-ticked checkboxes or where the flow to accept is easier than the one to decline (one click to accept, several clicks to decline) is not compliant either.
Finally, functional cookies such as for shopping carts or logged-in user sessions are explicitly allowed without requiring consent nor disclosure.
The problem here is not the design of the law but the lack of enforcement of it. All those obnoxious sites where you'd want to ad-block the consent popup are not compliant by default and should be fined. If the law was enforced we'd quickly see changes around this and consent popups would become unobtrusive.
IIRC, several sites actually got fined early on for using unobtrusive cookie pop ups, as it was ruled that people weren’t likely to notice them and therefore they didn’t count as “consent”.
Unobtrusive popups are fine as the regulation also mandates tracking to be opt-in, so if you don’t notice nor interact with the popup then you don’t opt-in and there are no problems.
The GDPR requires consent for tracking technologies for non-essential purposes. It can be cookies, but is not limited to them. Local storage or browser fingerprinting fits the bill as well.
Moving the cookie consent management into the browser won't fulfill the intent of the law - sure, cookies are now disabled by the browser, but what about fingerprinting or server logs? A compliant site will still need to ask for consent for those.
When it comes to user experience, the regulation explicitly sets rules around how you ask for consent. Consent should be freely given so that users are not forced to opt-in (you can't force them to accept, so cookie popups where opting out is not possible or "by using this site you agree to our use of cookies" notices are not compliant). Tracking should also be opt-in, so pre-ticked checkboxes or where the flow to accept is easier than the one to decline (one click to accept, several clicks to decline) is not compliant either.
Finally, functional cookies such as for shopping carts or logged-in user sessions are explicitly allowed without requiring consent nor disclosure.
The problem here is not the design of the law but the lack of enforcement of it. All those obnoxious sites where you'd want to ad-block the consent popup are not compliant by default and should be fined. If the law was enforced we'd quickly see changes around this and consent popups would become unobtrusive.