15 ms·
This is the equivalent of saying Company X makes the best light bulbs, we fear consumers won't buy other brands and so we don't want to allow X to sell bulbs.
by yalogin 6y ago
This is the equivalent of saying Company X makes the best light bulbs, we fear consumers won't buy other brands and so we don't want to allow X to sell bulbs.
If anything this is a privacy concern, and a huge motivation for regulation. Cookies at least gives some iota of control to the user to stop tracking and know when its happening. However with the new approach users will be tracked all over incessantly. There is no stopping it
It's not that hard to see other companies will adopt the same architecture and kill cookies. For example, I can bet facebook is working on something similar.
- dralley 6y agoBad analogy. It's more like, the company that controls the light bulb market, also controls most of the light fixture market, and decides to push for a new type of socket that they control the IP for. Except in the real world, unlike this analogy, they can magically change the socket of their own light bulbs and fixtures over the air at any time.
- judge2020 6y agoBut if that socket uses 3x less power for the same light output, and the automatic update reduces the power usage of the entire world overnight, wouldn't it be a net positive? Although, I suppose it could still be viewed as an anti-competitive action.
- kall 6y agoNo, this is nothing like lightbulbs. If you take the complaint at face value (limiting ad tracking for others more than yourself) it is a classic antitrust case: leveraging your earned position in one market to gain unearned advantage in an unrelated one. This disrupts the efficient functioning of markets, which makes it a problem.