3 ms·
Google's monopoly on ad tech is entirely orthogonal to the issue. As for PG's tweet, I think it's a bit much to call that single sentence an "analysis". At be
by CarelessExpert 6y ago
Google's monopoly on ad tech is entirely orthogonal to the issue.
As for PG's tweet, I think it's a bit much to call that single sentence an "analysis". At best it's an opinion, and not a very nuanced one at that.
Please explain how this isn't potentially an objective improvement of end user privacy over things like third party cookies, browser fingerprinting, or other mechanisms of identity tracking.
- hedora 6y agoHow is this orthogonal to their monopoly? They’re explicitly blocking direct competitors’ tracking mechanisms in favor of one they control. I answered your other questions in a sibling comment.
- CarelessExpert 6y agoWhat does Google's monopoly have to do with the privacy implications of the method they're now favouring? Either it's a more privacy-preserving method than current techniques and technologies or it's not, irrespective of the competitive landscape of the ad tech industry. I think it's objectively the case that this is certainly better than assigning unique identifiers to every user and tracking those IDs + associated segmentation in third party databases that are ripe for abuse. Is it perfect? No. But I didn't realize we were just gonna go full nirvana fallacy, here. If that's your bar, nothing short of eliminating targeted advertising entirely will satisfy you, in which case, frankly, you're being unrealistic.