I completely disagree about the death of the cookie. First, most users just don't care much. Second, killing 3rd party cookies is a huge gift to the handful o

I completely disagree about the death of the cookie. First, most users just don't care much. Second, killing 3rd party cookies is a huge gift to the handful of companies with, eg, single sign on so cross site visibility: fb and google. This was the problem with firefox's proposed ban on 3rd party cookies: I can't think of a bigger gift to give to google and fb. Now you may still support that under the theory that a few companies are easier to regulate than many, but I'm not sure that's a compelling case to regulators. I think the most likely outcome is we get european style cookie regulation, and the majority of sites put a click-dismissed banner on the top saying if you keep reading we get to cookie you. Oh, and if you do just use technical measures to kill 3rd party cookies, google et al can evade that by having pubs cname them into the first party then doing standard cookie stitching. Disorganized thoughts: Your ad solution sounds to me like a trip back to advertising 10 years ago -- lots of brand ads / dems targeting. Surveys are pretty crappy; high income dems tend not to respond; people lie; most publishers don't collect regdata; etc. Obviously a handful of pubs -- those used as proxies for rich demographics -- would love this (nyt, ios review sites, bmw/mercedes fan clubs) but for most pubs it would be a loss. Even with lots of direct response ads there is too much inventory continually driving ad rates down; I don't see how removing a bunch of demand would improve anything from most pubs' perspectives. Publishers uploading regdata also brings its own privacy problems.