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?
  • @abhibeckert@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Would you refuse to visit websites that force registration even if the account is free?

    Lots of sites require a free account these days. I don’t visit those sites.

    What’s all the fuss about, you don’t care?

    I care.

    Is advertising a necessary evil in fair trade for content?

    I like advertising - how else are you supposed to find out what products/services are available? Regularly visit every website of every company I might be interested in? That doesn’t work.

    It’s data collection I dislike, nothing wrong with ads as long as they’re a reasonably short interruption. Make ads relevant to the content, not the visitor.

    Unfortunately under the current system I don’t see ads, because the only way to block tracking is to also block most ads. Sorry, but ad networks have burned that bridge. It’s going to take time to rebuild it.

    Would this limit your visiting of websites to only a narrow few you are willing to trade personal details for?

    A website would need to offer some really valuable service for me to “trade personal details”. Even sites where I have an account (e.g. YouTube) I generally don’t log into that account.

    Is this a bad thing for the internet experience as whole, or just another progression of technology?

    I think anything that gives users control over wether or not they’re tracked is a good thing - and forcing people to sign up / agree to terms before using a site does that. If websites want my personal details to access them… that’s fine with me. I just won’t use those sites. Other people will make a different decision. It’s how it should be.

    I also think I’m not alone, and plenty of major sites will choose to just not do any tracking. I look forward to using those sites.

    Is this no different from using any other technology platform that’s free (If it’s free, you’re the product)?

    I reject that premise. Lemmy is free. I don’t feel like “the product” when I use lemmy. The product is the content and the discussions. If Lemmy has a few ads on every page, I’d be fine with that. I think it’d be a good idea - as long as it’s done right, without invading privacy.

    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?

    It’s their business, choose whatever revenue model they want. Just be honest and open about it.

      • @SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Now don’t be rude, what ever that person likes can’t be that b…😧…🤢…🤮🤮🤮

        Disgusting.

    • RedFoxOP
      link
      English
      34 months ago

      Other people will make a different decision. It’s how it should be

      This is an aspect of the predicted changes I can at least appreciate. Choice/consent. There should already have been obtained and informed consent. But instead, they just did it behind people’s backs. I say that because I don’t think most normal/non-tech people really know or care much about cookies and all the ways this stuff actually works.

      If Lemmy has a few ads on every page

      Ahhh! No please :) …but I understand. Unless these people (hosts) are getting those services paid for by something else, they might need to cover the costs of this like anything else. I really enjoy Lemmy because, at least right now, I feel like it’s in the true spirit of the internet and not a business. It can be for community and discussion like you said. Only reason I’m here. I like asking people why they feel a certain way about things and hopefully walk away with some understanding.

    • phillaholic
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -254 months ago

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

        • phillaholic
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -24 months ago

          The data collection is wide open here, which is my point.

        • phillaholic
          link
          fedilink
          English
          04 months ago

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

        • phillaholic
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -44 months ago

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

          • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            44 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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -34 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.

              • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                14 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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -14 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
                    14 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

              • @abhibeckert@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                4 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.

                • phillaholic
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  04 months ago

                  Write your congress person to enact a GDPR-like Bill. Short of that, as you’ve said, idk how sites are going to make money. The current situation is majorly self-inflicted. We don’t want to pay, so they have ads. We don’t want to see ads, so they collect and sell data. Now that VC money has dried up, it’s going to get worse and there’s no other answer.