4 ms·
The pessimist in me says its because too many users are blocking trackers. Going first party means their tracking is unblockable
by eggsnbacon1 6y ago
The pessimist in me says its because too many users are blocking trackers. Going first party means their tracking is unblockable
- turdnagel 6y agoIt's because browsers are starting to block third party trackers. Safari's doing it, and Google is planning on blocking third party cookies soon.
- konschubert 6y agoMaybe that’s still a step forward?
- eggsnbacon1 6y agoPossibly, but my fear is that ad networks will start installing frameworks on the content servers and use fingerprints instead of cookies for unique user id
- ickwabe 6y agoIt may be able blocking ads or not. But I dont think it's about tracking. NYTimes already ran a successful test in Europe where they eliminated all third party behavioral based ads and saw no revenue drop. https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/20/dont-be-creepy/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/20/dont-be-creepy/ I think they have just concluded that the story being told that sites must engage in creepy third party ad behavior is false and that they can just handle in house. Overall I think this is probably better.
- nerdponx 6y agoIf this turns out to be as good as it sounds, I might actually renew my NYT subscription.