4 ms·

Thanks for the rational reply. Some of the cynical and critical comments here strike me as far too idealistic. This seems like a completely reasonable step to t

by ssharp 11y ago

Thanks for the rational reply. Some of the cynical and critical comments here strike me as far too idealistic. This seems like a completely reasonable step to take in offering websites money for ad-free content without having to subscribe to individual content. The privacy argument, I can easier get on board with. Why does Google need to still track you if you're not seeing ads? Wasn't the point of ad tracking to get you more relevant ads, help advertisers with remarketing, etc. ?

delecti 11y ago
They need to track you to associate your contributor account with your browsing.
drdeca 11y ago
Well, 1) contributor doesn't always replace /all/ ads, 2) if you were ever to say, stop paying for Contributor... 3) in order to see what sites ad spots paid for with contributor? Edit: "We use machine learning to pace how much of your plan is spent each day."