4 ms·

That's what I've been wondering. If FLoC is better for privacy than current tracking methods and Google intends to switch to using FLoC instead of current track

That's what I've been wondering. If FLoC is better for privacy than current tracking methods and Google intends to switch to using FLoC instead of current tracking methods, wouldn't it be better for FLoC to succeed?

vimda 6y ago
Even if we assume that FLoC is entirely good, it's a false choice - why do we need _any_ tracking at all?
- bagacrap 6y ago
  The web survives by serving ads. Targeted ads earn content creators more. They earn more because of higher conversion rates, so presumably users like them more (ultimately if an ad makes me buy something, I probably appreciate having seen it).
livre 6y ago
The problem is that it isn't much better (if at all) in its current implementation. The current implementation allows tracking and identifying individual users (this may be or may not be fixed by Google, it has already been reported to their Github issue tracker). Since it is entirely based on your browsing patterns you can also be tracked cross device (people's browsing patterns rarely change). For the moment 3p cookies are better, they can easily be erased, blocked or even isolated, and are restricted to a single browser.
- bagacrap 6y ago
  I'll bet my browsing habits change substantially enough across devices to lead to different floc cohorts. I use my laptop differently than my phone and there are lots of cohorts.
GuB-42 6y ago
Yes, but it is unlikely to succeed. The problem is that it is an unstable strategy. FLoC is strictly worse for privacy-conscious users if trackers don't change their strategy, and it is also strictly worse for trackers to stop using their current tracking techniques. It is a bit like the prisoner dilemma.
clusmore 6y ago
The privacy of current tracking methods (3rd party cookies) is bad, which is why a lot of browser vendors are starting to block 3rd party cookies by default. FLoC may be marginally better than 3rd party cookies, but still browser vendors are mostly choosing to block it by default. There isn't a good reason to let either succeed.
- nabakin 6y ago
  True, that makes sense

vimda 6y ago

Even if we assume that FLoC is entirely good, it's a false choice - why do we need _any_ tracking at all?

bagacrap 6y ago
The web survives by serving ads. Targeted ads earn content creators more. They earn more because of higher conversion rates, so presumably users like them more (ultimately if an ad makes me buy something, I probably appreciate having seen it).

livre 6y ago

The problem is that it isn't much better (if at all) in its current implementation. The current implementation allows tracking and identifying individual users (this may be or may not be fixed by Google, it has already been reported to their Github issue tracker). Since it is entirely based on your browsing patterns you can also be tracked cross device (people's browsing patterns rarely change). For the moment 3p cookies are better, they can easily be erased, blocked or even isolated, and are restricted to a single browser.

bagacrap 6y ago
I'll bet my browsing habits change substantially enough across devices to lead to different floc cohorts. I use my laptop differently than my phone and there are lots of cohorts.

GuB-42 6y ago

Yes, but it is unlikely to succeed. The problem is that it is an unstable strategy. FLoC is strictly worse for privacy-conscious users if trackers don't change their strategy, and it is also strictly worse for trackers to stop using their current tracking techniques. It is a bit like the prisoner dilemma.

clusmore 6y ago

The privacy of current tracking methods (3rd party cookies) is bad, which is why a lot of browser vendors are starting to block 3rd party cookies by default. FLoC may be marginally better than 3rd party cookies, but still browser vendors are mostly choosing to block it by default. There isn't a good reason to let either succeed.

nabakin 6y ago
True, that makes sense