4 ms·
It also makes it easier to lobby for a privacy law with teeth (which Apple should absolutely be doing if they aren't already) when you can offer a solution to p
by Despegar 7y ago
It also makes it easier to lobby for a privacy law with teeth (which Apple should absolutely be doing if they aren't already) when you can offer a solution to politicians who might have genuine concerns about the economic impact.
- akersten 7y agoI don't think we need legislation that is overly prescriptive by saying "this is the particular feature of the current web that you need to use to be privacy compliant." That's what was wrong with the cookie law, and was one of the improvements the GDPR made - it didn't prescribe any particular solution for advertisers, just told them "you can't do this kind of thing." That is the basis of a good law (prohibit a specific behavior, not the implementation thereof). In that lens though, Apple's proposal is a solution in search of legislation, which screams "regulatory capture" to me - another reason I'm against it.
- Despegar 7y agoThey wouldn't mandate any specific technology, but it makes it infinitely more likely that Congress would pass a GDPR clone when they are confident that doing so wouldn't just destroy every web publisher's business. And it certainly disarms any disingenuous arguments by the ad-tech lobbyists along those lines.