This episode of Security Now covered Google’s plan to deprecate third party cookies and the reaction from advertising organizations and websites.

The articles and the opinions of the show hosts are that it may have negative or unintended consequences as rather than relying on Google’s proposed ad selection scheme being run on the client side (hiding information from the advertiser), instead they are demanding first party information from the sites regarding their user’s identification.

The article predicts that rather than privacy increasing, a majority of websites may demand user registration so they can collect personal details and force user consent to provide that data to advertisers.

What’s your opinion of website advertising, privacy, and data collection?

  • Would you refuse to visit websites that force registration even if the account is free?
  • What’s all the fuss about, you don’t care?
  • Is advertising a necessary evil in fair trade for content?
  • Would this limit your visiting of websites to only a narrow few you are willing to trade personal details for?
  • Is this a bad thing for the internet experience as whole, or just another progression of technology?
  • Is this no different from using any other technology platform that’s free (If it’s free, you’re the product)?
  • Should website owners just accept a lower revenue model and adapt their business, rather than seeking higher / unfair revenues from privacy invasive practices of the past?
  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I vehemently oppose Google having hegemony over web standards, but I’ll still happily enjoy the delicious schadenfreude of propagandists – excuse me, “advertisers” – getting screwed by that hegemony.

    • RedFox@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Google having hegemony over web standards

      You’re not wrong here. I think chrome browser is basically the Defacto browser, and it obviously allows google to do whatever it wants. Not great. The Mozilla / Brave options are barely that. I struggle to even call them competitors at this point.

      I definitely appreciate some of the EU’s recent privacy/monogoly focused legislation. Also, thanks EU for forcing a common sense charging cord standard and killing off the stupid lightning plug. IMO, if apple would have not been so greedy, they could have unlicensed it and maybe everyone would have used that. EAD apple :)

      • nintendiator@feddit.cl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        The Mozilla / Brave options are barely that.

        You mean “The Mozilla option”. Brave is just Yet Another Chrome Reskin.

        • RedFox@infosec.pubOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Brave is just Yet Another Chrome Reskin

          Good point. I don’t use it. I thought it stripped/blocked tracking though.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            That’s not the issue. The issue is that it uses the same rendering engine as Chrome, which means any random self-serving shit Google adds gets endorsed by Brave too unless they go out of their way to maintain a fork that removes it.