Live data from Hacker News

Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

theverge.com

21–30 of 186 posts

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#21

Just have it default-off, allow the user to turn it on if they want to be "ad targeted". I mean I keep hearing how, as a consumer, I want this.

I've spoken with more than 1 non-tech person who has said if they're going to see ads, they want them to be at least relevant, targeting nor not.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#22

Is it just me, or is FLoC simply an act? A way for Google to say, "See, regulators, we're trying! You don't have to regulate us, we're doing it on our own!" While they know full well the web will never get on board with this. Seems like just a way to buy time, to muddy the waters. Make the ecosystem more complicated. Pin the blame on others for not getting on board with your attempt to "fix" the situation. "We tried…

If it is, it's a pretty poor act. It doesn't matter if Firefox, Brave and Edge don't want to use Floc. Google controls Chrome and almost all of the non-FB digital ad ecosystem. They can still derive enormous benefits from it once third party cookies are extinct.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#23
post #9

These browsers make up less than 4% of market share and their actions are largely meaningless. Only fringe users (IE readers of hackernews) use these browsers. If you're looking for info on adtech changes outside of chrome, look at safari. Apple has been making big pro-privacy moves for a couple years, and they actually have meaningful market share.

Safari is the browser for iOS, so your 4% number is not accurate.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#25

Just have it default-off, allow the user to turn it on if they want to be "ad targeted". I mean I keep hearing how, as a consumer, I want this.

As a consumer, i want targeting features default-off.

As a consumer, I want targeting features default-on, but I also don't mind too much having to turn them on manually.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you support organ donation being opt-in as well?

Holy false equivalence batman. Organ donation is a great good for society, saves lives. Google's FLOC does what exactly?

ad targeting is good for economy and small businesses. Imagine all the wealth created by being able to show people ads they might be interested in seeing

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you support organ donation being opt-in as well?

Holy false equivalence batman. Organ donation is a great good for society, saves lives. Google's FLOC does what exactly?

You do want Google to be able to continue paying $200K+ to fresh college grads, don't you? Or do you want them starving in the streets, you heartless barbarian?

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#28

Just have it default-off, allow the user to turn it on if they want to be "ad targeted". I mean I keep hearing how, as a consumer, I want this.

I've spoken with more than 1 non-tech person who has said if they're going to see ads, they want them to be at least relevant, targeting nor not.

Surely they'd be happy to opt-in to FLoC.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#29

As a website owner, you can opt out by setting the Permissions-Policy header to "interest-cohort=()". I rolled that out for pirsch.io today.

Cmon, this is as backward as the "do not track" header... asking websites to explicitly opt out... in order to protect users from the users's own browser!?

No, just don't build stupid things into browsers.

Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC

#30
post #17

Between FLoC and AMP, Google's attempts to destroy the web have surpassed even IE levels of toxicity. It's good to see the consumer focused forks of Chromium take a stand here.

Using any version of Chromium still contributes to Google’s attempts to destroy the web. If they actually cared they would use a different engine.

You say that like there's another option.
Post reply on HN