3 ms·
"The facts are that [Firefox users] will get more ads, not less, and those ads will not be tailored to their interests," he said. "They'll see untargeted ads, w
by tinco 14y ago
"The facts are that [Firefox users] will get more ads, not less, and those ads will not be tailored to their interests," he said. "They'll see untargeted ads, which will look like spam.""
If this is truly the case then Firefox users will notice and either turn the third party cookies back on or complain/switch to chrome. If the effect is that big, and people want to see the targeted ads, what do the ad networks stand to lose?
Firefox is making a right move, there is now a distinctive conscious choice you can make: Firefox, privacy by default. Chrome and IE can never counter that (because of their affiliations with ad networks). Maybe its not the biggest reason to use a browser, but it's a big one and it enforces Firefox's position in the market.
- ne0phyte 14y agoChrome has an option to enable the Do-Not-Track request and to block all 3rd party cookies already. In the settings dialog that is, not in the chrome:// tweaks.
- Jgrubb 14y agowhat do the ad networks stand to lose? It's less about the actual ad networks. It's more that the sites who display ads that are better targeted and have a higher click through rate can charge more money for them and run fewer of those specific ads as a consequence. Businesses that are able to better target ads at people who might actually be in the market based on recent browsing behavior can spend their advertising money on reaching a higher quality audience. The alternative is that you get a spray of all kinds of ads that have no relevance.