5 ms·

I never suggested that, hell Apple does not even suggest that. They proposed an option for allowing ads without them being a privacy nightmare.

ehsankia 7y ago
Isn't that exactly what this blog post is proposing too?
- nerdjon 7y ago
  No it is not, Google is just proposing extra protections around existing mechanisms. That will continue to likely allow google nearly unlimited access to data. Apple's plan is a complete departure from current setups. https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-attribution-for-the-web/ https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-att... I don't really know if its viable, but its something.
  - ehsankia 7y ago
    That's not how I read it. To me, it just sounded like trying to standardize all the different approaches everyone is using, so we don't end up with a mess like the User-Agent field currently is, because everyone tries their own hack on top of hack on top of hack trying to play a cat and mouse game.
    - nerdjon 7y ago
      Trying to standardize is already what Mozilla and Apple (by openly stating their proposal was based on Mozilla) attempting to do. The only thing Google is doing by proposing this is to attempt to remove or lower the impact on them. Considering this in the beginning: >Recently, some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards, attempts to improve user privacy are having unintended consequences.
quotemstr 7y ago
> They proposed an option for allowing ads without them being a privacy nightmare. Non-personalized ads won't be lucrative enough to fund the web. Let's stop this equivocation. When people say that preventing tracking will kill advertising, they mean that it'll kill personalized advertising. When you respond to these concerns by pointing out that non-personalized advertising would still be possible, you're using this one word, "advertising", to refer to a different concept. Word games make for bad arguments.
- ziddoap 7y ago
  How is showing advertisements for your product not advertising? TV advertisements don't monitor every show I watch and channel I surf to, but they are still called advertisements. You don't need to sniff my metaphorical underwear to serve me advertisements, and the definition of advertisement surely doesn't depend upon harvesting user data.
  - quotemstr 7y ago
    > How is showing advertisements for your product not advertising? Quoting my own post, which you either didn't read or didn't understand: when people say that preventing tracking will kill advertising, they mean that it'll kill personalized advertising. > You don't need to sniff my metaphorical underwear to serve me advertisement Without personalization, ads aren't profitable enough to fund free-to-use web services. > definition of advertisement Nobody is talking about the definition of advertisement.
    - ziddoap 7y ago
      I did read you post, thanks, and I misunderstood your statement that personalized advertising =/= advertising. >Without personalization, ads aren't profitable enough to fund free-to-use web services. I'll take a citation with that, please.
- dhimes 7y ago
  Non-personalized ads won't be lucrative enough to fund the web. Yes they will. They will be plenty lucrative. Banner ads work fine. Non-personalized ads funded TV and radio for decades.

ehsankia 7y ago

Isn't that exactly what this blog post is proposing too?

nerdjon 7y ago
No it is not, Google is just proposing extra protections around existing mechanisms. That will continue to likely allow google nearly unlimited access to data. Apple's plan is a complete departure from current setups. https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-attribution-for-the-web/ https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-att... I don't really know if its viable, but its something.
- ehsankia 7y ago
  That's not how I read it. To me, it just sounded like trying to standardize all the different approaches everyone is using, so we don't end up with a mess like the User-Agent field currently is, because everyone tries their own hack on top of hack on top of hack trying to play a cat and mouse game.
  - nerdjon 7y ago
    Trying to standardize is already what Mozilla and Apple (by openly stating their proposal was based on Mozilla) attempting to do. The only thing Google is doing by proposing this is to attempt to remove or lower the impact on them. Considering this in the beginning: >Recently, some other browsers have attempted to address this problem, but without an agreed upon set of standards, attempts to improve user privacy are having unintended consequences.

quotemstr 7y ago

> They proposed an option for allowing ads without them being a privacy nightmare. Non-personalized ads won't be lucrative enough to fund the web. Let's stop this equivocation. When people say that preventing tracking will kill advertising, they mean that it'll kill personalized advertising. When you respond to these concerns by pointing out that non-personalized advertising would still be possible, you're using this one word, "advertising", to refer to a different concept. Word games make for bad arguments.

ziddoap 7y ago
How is showing advertisements for your product not advertising? TV advertisements don't monitor every show I watch and channel I surf to, but they are still called advertisements. You don't need to sniff my metaphorical underwear to serve me advertisements, and the definition of advertisement surely doesn't depend upon harvesting user data.
- quotemstr 7y ago
  > How is showing advertisements for your product not advertising? Quoting my own post, which you either didn't read or didn't understand: when people say that preventing tracking will kill advertising, they mean that it'll kill personalized advertising. > You don't need to sniff my metaphorical underwear to serve me advertisement Without personalization, ads aren't profitable enough to fund free-to-use web services. > definition of advertisement Nobody is talking about the definition of advertisement.
  - ziddoap 7y ago
    I did read you post, thanks, and I misunderstood your statement that personalized advertising =/= advertising. >Without personalization, ads aren't profitable enough to fund free-to-use web services. I'll take a citation with that, please.
dhimes 7y ago
Non-personalized ads won't be lucrative enough to fund the web. Yes they will. They will be plenty lucrative. Banner ads work fine. Non-personalized ads funded TV and radio for decades.