-
This is a reasonable argument and nothing in here is inaccurate (it should absolutely be easier to opt out of first party tracking everywhere). However, the 3p/1p argument is more than this. Privacy is impossible to achieve without getting rid of 3p first. mobiledevmemo.com/the-privacy-mirage/Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 7 Favorites
Mood 0
-
Yes, the end of 3p is going to advantage existing successful and effective walled gardens of user data, which includes (and by market share mostly is) Big Tech... but those parties are already advantaged in the marketplace... there's a reason we talk about the Duopoly.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood +10 🙂
-
We can't solve what is fundamentally a regulatory problem (these companies are too large) with an engineering solution (3p/UUIDs). Big tech's share of the advertising market has been steadily growing despite all the attempts made by ad tech and publishers to compete.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood +1 🙂
-
The end of 3p--to be 100% clear--is not intended to be a salve or improvement to the market. It is not. It will not. It could never be. The market's total dumpster fire state is not solvable by anything ad tech could do. The end of 3p is about enhancing human rights on the web.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 7 Favorites
Mood 0
-
This is the main goal post and trying to muddy the waters by talking about market deformation is irrelevant. Not being tracked outside of the site you are interacting via automated transaction systems is absolutely an improvement in the state of web privacy.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
Would the US Gov't turning Google into a set of Baby Bells be a larger improvement to the state of web privacy than the end of 3p? Yes. But! That would only be the case *if 3p no longer existed*. A more private future *cannot be enabled* unless 3p goes away first.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 3 Favorites
Mood +2 🙂
-
The nature of how the market works is that, without an intervention, the big keep getting bigger and the small keep getting smaller. This is an economic issue, a regulatory one. It really sucks and while it has a major privacy impact it is not a solvable impact by engineers.On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
User data leakage outside of the 1st party *is solvable* to some extent by engineers, it can be done and therefore it--like anything else we can do to stop discrimination, manipulation and a loss of individuals' privacy--is a moral responsibility.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -4 🙁
-
And here's the thing, the Duopoly, the current state of the ad tech marketplace, these things disadvantage publishers economically. Fixing them won't happen overnight. But it needs to happen, just like the state of user privacy on the web right now cannot persist.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
But we can look at our constituencies as publishers: our readers, advertisers, & democracy. We can filter our decision making through what serves the majority of these parties as best as possible. For readers and democracy, privacy is the obvious answer.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +3 🙂
-
Even for advertisers, in the long term... a more stable democracy means a more stable market, means a more stable set of customers and brands and healthier companies. From this perspective, privacy will eventually advantage them as well.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +8 🙂
-
To say the redefinition of user privacy is arbitrary, to me misses the point. It isn't arbitrary, what was arbitrary was the claim users could have any privacy under the previous system of the advertising marketplace. Now we're trying not to redefine privacy, but to build it...Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 3 Favorites
Mood 0
-
And when you build something from scratch--and yes, that's what is being done in regards to user privacy on the web, that's how broken it is--you have to build it one step at a time. You can't just launch it all at once. Ending 3p is the first necessary step.Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood 0
-
I think that in the great and very detailed discussions about how we build a post-3p web we can get sort of lost in the details. The larger issue is not an engineering or market question... it is an inescapable moral one.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood 0
-
"Many engineers just make bad technology because they don’t think about humans when they’re making it. ... you have to start to realize your actions have consequences. It is indefensible to lack morals in software when we have such a huge impact." vice.com/en/article/7x5an4/why-i-quit-githubPermalink On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood -4 🙁