4 ms·
That is not an option. Competition regulators in the UK, US, and EU all made it clear that Chrome could not remove on-by-default third party cookie support wit
by jsnell 3y ago
That is not an option.
Competition regulators in the UK, US, and EU all made it clear that Chrome could not remove on-by-default third party cookie support without a replacement that worked well enough for other ad networks.
The UK CMA did it with a formal consent decree, EU, the US states, and DOJ each "just" threatened anti-trust action if it happened.
It isn't a false dichotomy; the choice really is between 3p tracking cookies vd. something like the Topics API.
- Sephr 3y agoAd networks still make 48% as much revenue on average on browsers that don't support third-party cookies. That is plenty. Users don't need to assist ad networks.
- jsnell 3y agoYes, you've repeated your opinion on that often enough that nobody doubts that it indeed is your opinion. But the fact is that the regulators covering basically all of the West don't share that opinion. In fact, they're not merely neutral on it. They have expressly forbidden Google from doing what you want. And while your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, as a practical matter what the regulators decide will trump that opinion.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoI would expect that if Google also stopped tracking users it would pass muster; the thing that's illegal is using the browser monopoly to unfairly benefit the ads side of the house. Regardless, "Google is legally obligated to not protect your privacy" is the weirdest pro-Firefox argument I've read lately, but I guess it's an acceptable conclusion.