It’s my strong belief that every single system is in violation of the requirements. The requirements are so vague I can poke holes in almost any system described to me and consider it not compliant. So if a law exists that nobody can effectively comply with, what use is it?

I see your point, and I wish it were clearer. But my expectation (and experience) is that judges don’t follow overly literate interpretations. Possibly a EU/US difference?

Uhhh so your argument is the law is vague and everyone is in violation but it’s okay because if you try to be somewhat compliant the EU won’t attack you. Yeah, lawfully that’s not something a business can roll the dice with.

Yet it’s what every business currently operating in the EU has been doing since May 25, and the world hasn’t ended yet

It’s utterly pointless to design a law that is ineffective in protecting users and also impossible to comply to and still be vulnerable to audits even after you spent millions to vaguely comply.

My prediction is it’ll have hugely positive effects for users’ privacy because, as @clemensv said, it has teeth. I also predict courts won’t follow pointless interpretations that don’t have users’ interests in mind

Even with the law being as it is, it already forced massive changes in behavior.

It’s also caused some businesses to close doors and employees are left unemployed.

It did? Can you share some examples?