Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

digiday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#71

Post by judiisis »

SquareWheel wrote: post #22
nerdjon wrote: post #8

I am not convinced this is ever going to actually happen. Google won't roll this out until they are sure that their new solution basically has the same effect for advertisers as cookies, but with a new fancy name with "privacy" in it (when its anything but). Google needs to be forced to spin out Chrome to someone else, it is a clear conflict of interest when nearly every (or every? are there any that haven't?) other…

That doesn't reflect the reality of the situation. Google has been trying to make this transition happen for years. The CMA is the one strong-arming them into maintaining the status quo. The article even mentions 39 new concerns raised which has resulted in yet another extension. Without this interference, third-party party cookies would have been dead years ago.

Privacy sandbox is not private, that's why ICO(UK's privacy watchdog) raised concerns,https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-cookies-replacement-not-enou...

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#72

Post by [deleted] »

grishka wrote: post #37

Why don't they just unilaterally disable third-party cookies by default without providing any replacement? The only slightly valuable functionality that would be lost would be authentication in comment widgets like Disqus. Ah, right, the makers of the world's most popular web browser are also the world's most profitable online advertising company, that's why.

[deleted]

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#73

Post by [deleted] »

ethbr1 wrote: post #13

Meanwhile, in the Chrome MV2 -> MV3 extension saga, it seems like June 2024 is the newest new date in which MV2 may be phased out in pre-stable versions of Chrome. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to... At least, to Google's credit, they're starting to listen to users who give them solid reasons why a surprise migration isn't feasible... tomorrow.

[deleted]

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#74

Post by nicce »

surajrmal wrote: post #69
oblio wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defaults matter. 95% of people don't change defaults.

Chrome is not the default on anything other than android and ChromeOS. Yet it's quite popular to use chrome on Mac, Windows, Linux, and iOS.

When I was young and I did not understand much about computers, and Chromium was also young, I was receiving a somewhat local paper magazine about computers.

This magazine had their OWN branded browser, based on Chromium and many used that.

Now that I think about, what a gigachad magazine.

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#75

Post by dspillett »

delish wrote: post #45

I pay for Youtube Premium, which uses third-party cookies to not show ads on embedded videos. https://privacysandbox.com talks about advertising, but not "logged in elsewhere" functionality. Does Youtube or Google have something ready, or will all Youtube Premium subscribers see ads on embedded videos?

> Youtube Premium, which uses third-party cookies to not show ads on embedded videos

The third party cookies don't control ads in embedded videos, there are currently no ads in embedded videos whether you have paid for premium or not.

I have a bookmarklet that converts a youtube page to an embed for this reason, for when I get sick of seeing the same couple of adverts on a loop.

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#76

Post by [deleted] »

jiveturkey wrote: post #68
SquareWheel wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why don't they just unilaterally disable third-party cookies by default without providing any replacement? It's explained in the article, and below in this thread. They legally cannot due to intervention from the CMA.

That's not what the article says. The CMA is intervening based on their plan of replacing cookies with Topics (née FLoC). If they just wanted to drop 3p cookies without a replacement, they could.

[deleted]

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#77

Post by semiquaver »

dspillett wrote: post #75
delish wrote: post #45

I pay for Youtube Premium, which uses third-party cookies to not show ads on embedded videos. https://privacysandbox.com talks about advertising, but not "logged in elsewhere" functionality. Does Youtube or Google have something ready, or will all Youtube Premium subscribers see ads on embedded videos?

> Youtube Premium, which uses third-party cookies to not show ads on embedded videos The third party cookies don't control ads in embedded videos, there are currently no ads in embedded videos whether you have paid for premium or not. I have a bookmarklet that converts a youtube page to an embed for this reason, for when I get sick of seeing the same couple of adverts on a loop.

I see ads in YouTube embeds all the time.

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#78

Post by nolist_policy »

judiisis wrote: post #70
nolist_policy wrote: post #19

Dear CMA, Can you please let Google do the right thing and disable third party cookies like every other browser vendor.

"privacy sandbox" is a deceiving name,it is a harmful tracking tech,glad regulators(UK's privacy watchdog ICO) are waking up,but that also means status quo of 3rd party cookies remains until it's fixed https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-cookies-replacement-not-enou...

Per my understanding, privacy sandbox has been rolled out for a long time already. There is no reason to still keep third party cookies around.

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#79

Post by alt227 »

jsnell wrote: post #16
nerdjon wrote: post #8

I am not convinced this is ever going to actually happen. Google won't roll this out until they are sure that their new solution basically has the same effect for advertisers as cookies, but with a new fancy name with "privacy" in it (when its anything but). Google needs to be forced to spin out Chrome to someone else, it is a clear conflict of interest when nearly every (or every? are there any that haven't?) other…

This isn't Google strong-arming the web. This is Google desperately wanting to turn off third-party cookies, and being told again and again by regulators that they aren't allowed to do so.

The question that you need to ask is why they desperately want to get rid of them.

The answert is that the solution they are proposing hinders other ad compnies and give google unfair advantage in the ad space. Hence the they are not allowed to do for competition reasons.

Re: Google delays third-party cookie demise yet again

#80

Post by alt227 »

nerdjon wrote: post #23
jsnell wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't Google strong-arming the web. This is Google desperately wanting to turn off third-party cookies, and being told again and again by regulators that they aren't allowed to do so.

Google has strong armed the web in other situations with Chrome, there are multiple cases of them implementing things that google has proposed to w3c but has not been accepted yet. Regarding this, it's been 4 years. I am not letting google off the hook with this, especially when many other browsers already block third party cookies. I stand by my opinion that an ad company operating a browser is a clear conflict of i…

> there are multiple cases of them implementing things that google has proposed to w3c but has not been accepted yet.

Yes but the question is why is anyone using those things when they are only supported in a single browser? If its not fully supported by the major 4 browsers then its not getting put in my code, simple.

Post reply on HN