It's remarkable how much the debate around this topic has been poisoned by talking points from the data monitization industry. That the internet would completel

It's remarkable how much the debate around this topic has been poisoned by talking points from the data monitization industry. That the internet would completely cease to exist without the ability of the big ad giants to profile people's interests and sell cohorts of people with those interests to ad buyers or even worse to sell the data itself. The truth is: 1) Business models other than those depending on ad revenue exist. The internet would not disappear even if no advertising was ever shown to anybody. Yes it would be very different from the present internet. 2) Non-targeted advertising exists and is widely purchased. When I walk outside my door I see busses with adverts on the side, billboards on the side of the road and at public transport etc. None of these are targetted except perhaps in the most generalized fashion. 3) Even if we allow targetting, targetted advertising based on content rather than the consumer of that content exists and is successful (eg the ads that show as part of TV programming, ads in print media etc). This suggests that is highly likely that even if we just completely disallow all tracking of individuals and their interests, the internet advertising industry would continue to exist and to fund content by showing ads alongside content that is likely to attract the right audience, rather than being specifically spoonfed that audience by Google/Facebook etc. It is simply untrue that we have to work with people who want to do this sort of incredibly invasive thing, and in particular there is no reason for anyone ever to trust these particular organisations who not only have a vested interest in destroying people's privacy, have a track record of statements and actions showing that they have always considered doing so to be no big deal.