2 ms·
The 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 b
by alisonkisk 6y ago
The 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.