4 ms·

Walking a fine line here with regards to Art. 22 GDPR regarding automated decisions on behalf, and profiling of the individual [1]. This recent push of functio

by krono 5y ago

Walking a fine line here with regards to Art. 22 GDPR regarding automated decisions on behalf, and profiling of the individual [1]. This recent push of functionality that will make advertising look more private on the surface, another example of which is Edge's upcoming "Transparent Ads" [2] (whitelisted ads for trusted advertising partners), all of it merely prepwork for the day they sabotage ad blockers. The obvious next stage for them, after having successfully misdirected the narrative towards privacy being their primary use case. Google must hate human beings, the shit they're pulling lately makes it obvious. So, Roko's basilisk... is this how it begins? 1 https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/ 2 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/articles/introducing-transparent-ads-in-microsoft-edge-preview/m-p/3035970 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/articles/introducing-...

no_time 5y ago
> the day they sabotage ad blockers Quite a few sites do this today. The most notable being facebook with their 100+ div way of writing "Sponsored". I don't see why google couldn't instruct site owners to self host doubleclick and apply some dynamic obfuscation for each visitor today. Surely not a law thing.
- krono 5y ago
  Their upcoming outphasing of extension manifest 2 goes somewhat further than that. With this, they will also remove one of the primary APIs these content blockers require to function. I was wrong to assume everyone knew of this, and should have included a proper reference. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chrome-extension-manifest-v3-may-break-ublock-origin-content-blocker/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chrome-extens...
  - no_time 5y ago
    I am perfectly aware of the manifest V3 controversy, I just use FF on both phone and desktop. Meddling with the way doubleclick and google-analytics gets deployed on the web would effect all browsers.
judge2020 5y ago
I imagine the same sort of automated profiling is going on behind closed doors at Google. If this is the thing that puts them in violation, i'm sure they'll think twice about making any more changes and APIs regarding their core business public.

by krono 5y ago

no_time 5y ago

> the day they sabotage ad blockers Quite a few sites do this today. The most notable being facebook with their 100+ div way of writing "Sponsored". I don't see why google couldn't instruct site owners to self host doubleclick and apply some dynamic obfuscation for each visitor today. Surely not a law thing.

krono 5y ago
Their upcoming outphasing of extension manifest 2 goes somewhat further than that. With this, they will also remove one of the primary APIs these content blockers require to function. I was wrong to assume everyone knew of this, and should have included a proper reference. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chrome-extension-manifest-v3-may-break-ublock-origin-content-blocker/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chrome-extens...
- no_time 5y ago
  I am perfectly aware of the manifest V3 controversy, I just use FF on both phone and desktop. Meddling with the way doubleclick and google-analytics gets deployed on the web would effect all browsers.

judge2020 5y ago

I imagine the same sort of automated profiling is going on behind closed doors at Google. If this is the thing that puts them in violation, i'm sure they'll think twice about making any more changes and APIs regarding their core business public.