Isn't the problem about actual tracking and not the cookies?
If you track someone without using any cookie you still need to ask for consent.
I kind of don't understand the this post. Can someone explain why is it okay to track someone without cookie?
Exactly - cookies are only the most used because they have the largest support by browsers (going back 10 years). If you used purely local storage instead, you’d still need consent to track.
GDPR regulates tracking individuals, and is not particular about the means or form. On the whole, GDPR is pretty sensible.
There is an older law called the ePrivacy Directive that regulates cookies. Under this law, cookies require consent even if they are not used for tracking, unless they are strictly necessary for technical reasons. This law is a big pain the butt because many reasonable and legitimate uses for cookies aren't "strictly necessary."
The ePrivacy Directive technically applies to reading or writing data from a browser, so it will equally apply to any fingerprinting method you care to think of.
