I got a different interpretation from that paragraph than what you suggest. The interview doesn't state that 3rd party cookies are good. Rather, they argue tha

I got a different interpretation from that paragraph than what you suggest. The interview doesn't state that 3rd party cookies are good. Rather, they argue that they are required to have a "healthy" targeted ads market: > So the question then is, what do consumers want? Do they want no targeted advertising? Well, then you can’t have an ad tech industry. Do they want targeted advertising that benefits the business that’s sending it, like the dog walker or the New York Times? That would require competition in the ad tech market. Of course, that conclusion rests on the assumption that "we" want a targeted ad market, an assumption that many here will dispute. But that's not the point of the lawsuit - their point is rather "Since this market exists, then the people must want it. And since people want it, we need to ensure that there's enough competition". "This class of business shouldn't exist" is not within the scope of this particular case.