4 ms·
This proposal coupled with phasing out third-party cookies inconveniences competitors, while allowing Google to continue gobbling up user data without disruptio
by dessant 6y ago
This proposal coupled with phasing out third-party cookies inconveniences competitors, while allowing Google to continue gobbling up user data without disruption, because their tracking capabilities are way past needing any cookies, or this new cohort API.
- alisonkisk 6y agoThe article is about a non-tracking capability to collect less user data. Inconveniencing trackers is good for privacy, not bad. Anyway, mods, here's a much better article that has more than one line of vague content: https://github.com/WICG/floc https://github.com/WICG/floc
- dessant 6y agoGoogle only cares about privacy, when it disproportionately hurts the competition. Meanwhile they are using their leverage to infect web standards with a tracking proposal, and they market it as a privacy win. Features used exclusively for tracking have no place among web standards, cohort-based or otherwise.
- gnud 6y agoThis looks to me as a way for Google to drastically increase their reach and track even more data about their "users". They want the browser to "discover" the users interests automatically during browsing. For a page to be excluded from this, the page author would have to set a new policy header. And then your browser reports these interest to whatever tracker (for example Google) asks for the information. Suddently Google can learn about what you're browsing even if GA is blocked.
- tyingq 6y agoI think that's a good observation. That they don't need cookies or this proposal. So, anything that performs less well than cookies hurts them less than their competitors.