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?
  • phillaholic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    9 months ago

    You had to sign up for a free account to post this comment don’t you?

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        You can make all those up, no one’s checking. (Yet, but that’s a different topic)

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Did I? You signed up for an account where data collection is wide open to everyone.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Which was irrelevant.

          The user had commented that they didn’t want to sign up to browse content and then they further clarified that making a comment was worth signing up for sometimes.

          But for some reason you are insisting the context doesn’t matter? Either signup is always good or bad, we have to choose?

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Overall I’m just tired of hearing how _____ is going to ruin the web, or how evangelical people get about not doing something on principle. Sites that “login-wall” their content aren’t going to succeed, but people refusing to create an account acting all doom and gloom are getting to be insufferable.

            • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              people refusing to create an account acting all doom and gloom are getting to be insufferable

              I’m not doom and gloom, I think this is a good step in the right direction.

              Users should be able to control what websites have access to their data and a sign in process achieves that. Only sign into a site if you are happy with the website’s privacy policy. I have an account on this website because it has in the privacy policy:

              We do not sell or disclose user data under any condition, unless required by relevant data protection authorities, any other law enforcement authorities, or if the account owner requests the data themselves.

              The thing that offends me the most about tracking across the internet is you are tracked wether you agree to a website’s privacy policy or not. Usually you can’t even read the privacy policy without being tracked.

              Users who don’t care about any of that can simply tap this button in Chrome (and Google could easily make it even more seamless if they want to, with a simple “share my stuff with every website I visit” setting):

              There are also less invasive versions of that, such as the Passkeys standard, where you just share a unique id web the website - no name or email address. Passkeys are supported in every modern browser and the prompt is pretty similar to the screenshot above, minus the ‘share your name/email/picture’ bit.

              Personally, I’m only going to sign into websites that I trust. 99.999% of the internet is run by companies i have never even heard of, so obviously I don’t trust them. And some of the sites I have heard of (e.g. Twitter, Reddit), I definitely don’t trust. But there are a few sites like lemmy.world which I trust and there are also plenty of websites websites that do even less tracking than Lemmy. Including a bunch that are ad supported… because you can show an ad to a visitor without knowing the personal details of that visitor.

              As things stand right now, I run a browser extension that stops websites from tracking me and they do that by blocking all ads. I don’t see that as a sustainable option - it means those websites are losing money whenever I visit the website. Far better, far more honest, if I just don’t visit those websites at all. But I need to know what the website’s tracking policy is before i can make that choice, so they need to start asking for permission.

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

              the user just stated an opinion. you still didn’t explain why the context didn’t matter to you. sounds like you’re one of those people who is annoyed by principals. maybe Lemmy is not for you.

              • phillaholic@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                You may be right about the last point. My feed is full of posts from three days ago, talk of cutting off parts of the fediverse that seems to be the antithesis of federation, and other evangelical stances that are abandoned the second consequences come up. It was amusing at first, but it’s starting to seem like a waste of time. Idk.

                • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  stances that are abandoned the second consequences come up.

                  So what you’re saying is that people have to weigh pros and cons and they aren’t binary thinkers like you. Great job buddy

                  • phillaholic@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Oh, thanks for reminding me; Also people who misrepresent your position and write it off in one sentence. You have no idea what I’m talking about.