Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox is a good option!
Firefox is the FreeBSD of browsers. Only good for very specific reasons as compared to Linux (Chromium).
Well that's incorrect. I only use Firefox at home. Works fantastic.
Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
131–140 of 186 posts
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks. Good thread. Sounds like FloC is definitely more anonymous than third party cookies that are already in use today. There might are some hypothetical situations with FLoC where some information might be able to be inferred given sufficient data, but this is not trivial/direct like it is today.
> Sounds like FloC is definitely more anonymous than third party cookies that are already in use today. Not at all. My browser deletes cookies from any website (by default) as soon as I close the last tab for a given open site. If the browser itself starts tracking me, my privacy is reduced, not enhanced.
I would think that whenever the "clear cookies" command is given to a browser, it also clears the FloC ids. Is that not the case?
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I see FLoC is that it's nothing more than a compromise. This isn't a web standards feature like WebMIDI or WebHID that fulfills the (ever expanding) requests for features from web developers. It isn't a feature that the average user would ever ask for. It's simply a way for Google's ads business to continue functioning in spite of a web community that is gradually becoming privacy-conscious.
"Okay, it is true I can do nothing to force you to eat this pile of poo and I have nothing as means of payment, but let's make a compromise: How about you eat half?" How about no, Google? DRM made its way into browsers only barely, and in that case they at least had something people wanted.
[deleted]
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#134These 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 one of the browsers mentioned in the article.
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#135FWIW, I've been blocking all 3rd party cookies in Firefox for years.
Yes it's the first thing I do when I install a new browser. I'm not sure how well that protects me from tracking but I do notice that the creepier kind of stuff stops happening. I've also noticed that it's been getting harder and harder to find and activate the third party cookies block with successive version of Chrome.
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#136Rant ON.
Third party cookies are surveillance tech. So is FLoC. There is no need to track a person from one web site to another like some stalker. Any tech to stalk people like this isn't a good idea in general.
This is antithesis to multiple business models. I know. But I see no reason to accomodate faulty models. Ironically however, I'm not against advertising. But my experience with targeted ads is that they are useless anyway. I remember having gone to plenty of websites searching for very specific but commonly bought car parts. Google had full transactions as I wandered through various websites. Google searches etc all that data along with time of day. Did they provide useful ads? No. Really? That was with third party cookies enabled. I've been looking for parts and am actively buying parts and yet no useful ads, even from parts competitors? All that tech and I'm still having to dig around for suppliers? What about tools? Nope. Not a single relevant ad. Even with access to my search history. Not even when I have purchase receipts emailed to me. Amazon footprints, emails etc going to gmail. Searches done while logged into chrome.
Can't help the feeling that this stalking actually has little to do with real advertising and is more about authoritarian ideals. Real advertisers would have an advertising arrangement set up with each website. Then just cross reference the first party cookie ids in aggregate. Third party cookies were never necessary. So this leaves us with the third party cookies purely for stalking purposes.
So I gave up. Now I just use ddg and figure that the tracking is purely for surveillance. I have no guilt now in dropping third party cookies.
Perhaps, instead of using surveillance tech, why can't I tell google search I'm doing a project involving cars. And it goes and does its correlation magic to explore what I actually use and need. It could do actual linking. Show me actual suppliers. Affiliate links. I could add additional searches and attach them to the project as well. Eg add a line item for insurance, etc. now google knows I need insurance as well. Show me options. More opportunities...
But that would all be useful. It would help advertising and drive sales.
And this tracking is really about surveillance, isn’t it...?
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#137I'm definitely in the minority of commenters on these FLoC threads. I hate that 3rd party cookies exist, and support FLoC if it would hasten the demise of 3rd party cookies. It seems like many consider the alternative to FLoC to be an anonymous web where content can be accessed without login. The migration of content into walled gardens like Instagram seems more likely to me.
You: Here's a cute picture of my cat, I'll post it on Instagram for my friends Instagram: cool! We're showing this to all your friends. BTW it costs us money to do this but don't worry, we don't charge you, we just show some ads to your friends. You: Hey, my kitten is really popular, a lot of people are liking it. Instagram: High five! You're popular. We ended up making a lot more money from selling ads than it cost…
Your “cut” is having a place to store, view, and share your cat photos online.
The web only has two business models: users pay for a service or advertisers pay for a service.
I’m all in favor of paying for services, but it turns out most people prefer ads to breaking out their wallet.
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#138I'm definitely in the minority of commenters on these FLoC threads. I hate that 3rd party cookies exist, and support FLoC if it would hasten the demise of 3rd party cookies. It seems like many consider the alternative to FLoC to be an anonymous web where content can be accessed without login. The migration of content into walled gardens like Instagram seems more likely to me.
I'm minority as well, as I think that targeted ads are important for the Internet. First of all, I think that ads in the Internet are important, it's a driving force. Without ads there will be no Internet with lots of "free" resources, everything valuable will be paywalled which is a problem for poor people and nuisance for the rest. That's already an issue for many information websites because of abundant adblock us…
> First of all, I think that ads in the Internet are important, it's a driving force. Without ads there will be no Internet with lots of "free" resources, everything valuable will be paywalled which is a problem for poor people and nuisance for the rest.
Wikipedia might just be the most valuable information resource there is with the Stackexchange network also ranking highly. The former has no ads and the latter has a negligible number. High-quality traditional media are often already pay-walled.
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#139People say how they hate surveillance tech, but at the end of the day, it pays half of the bills on this website.
Most probably, there is Google Analytics and Facebook pixel on the very site you are building right now.
So all these horribly, horribly outraged comments ring kind of hollow to me. I mean look at how many trackers are on The Verge site itself.
Yeah FLoC is horrible. I hope it dies in a fire.
It's just, people that build websites want tracking. And it works. Retargeting works, banners work. That's why it's everywhere, nonstop. We all do it, we secretly crave all the tracking data from our users. We are addicted to A/B testing and referrer tracking and ad revenue. So, I donno.
There is a reason why Google does this.
Re: Nobody is joining Google's FLoC
#140Rant ON. Third party cookies are surveillance tech. So is FLoC. There is no need to track a person from one web site to another like some stalker. Any tech to stalk people like this isn't a good idea in general. This is antithesis to multiple business models. I know. But I see no reason to accomodate faulty models. Ironically however, I'm not against advertising. But my experience with targeted ads is that they are u…
I absolutely agree with your statement.
Anecdotally, the majority of targeted ads I see are for services or products I already use or pay for! That makes no sense to me. It does not drive loyalty, it simply annoys me. I’d opt out in a second if possible. Please give me contextual ads.