Remember Google's great 'we will end third-party cookies in Chrome' swindle:
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
Google has been misleading everyone for years, making regulators, policymakers and an entire industry think tracking based on third-party cookies will soon go away.
Even civil society organizations stopped most strategic litigation regarding digital profiling across sites and vendors based on browser identification.
Plus, everyone wasted so much time following Google's ever-changing 'privacy sandbox' plans.
Highly effective distraction.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
I still think the UK competition regulator CMA, together with the UK data protection authority ICO, played right into Google's hands by telling them to delay the end of third-party cookies rather than banning Google from certain data processing and other business practices :/
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
To make things worse, Google also made a policy u-turn on digital fingerprinting.
Since at least 2019, it had a 'strict policy' against fingerprinting, as it doesn't allow 'user control and transparency'.
In December 2024, Google stated that it will no longer prohibit it, which made even the ICO angry:
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-centre/news-and-blogs/2024/12/our-response-to-google-s-policy-change-on-fingerprinting/
Once again, regulators, policymakers and civil society organizations did no longer focus much on fingerprinting, as Google's prohibition has long been very clear.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
Now Google suddenly claims that IP addresses 'are already commonly used in the broader ads ecosystem to help marketers reach people', and with 'new innovations' like (pseudo) privacy-enhancing technologies, it's basically just fine to use them for fingerprinting in the future.
https://support.google.com/marketingplatform/answer/15732590?hl=en
https://support.google.com/platformspolicy/answer/15610408
https://support.google.com/platformspolicy/answer/15738904
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
Google didn't only announce that it will be 'less prescriptive with partners in how they target and measure ads', but it even stated that 'the ecosystem should invest in and develop solutions that are effective and measurable in an incredibly fragmented environment'.
Put differently, Google is ordering the 'ecosystem' to build more intrusive tracking and profiling tech.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
Of course, digital profiling is even much more problematic on mobile than in the web browser. Google is responsible for systematic data misuse for commercial and other purposes at a massive scale by providing hundreds of thousands of companies with persistent device identifiers ('advertising IDs').
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from wchr@mastodon.social
@wchr I don't see any signs for a "swindle", parts of Google did really want to phase out third party cookies. Probably they wanted to be prepared for big privacy lawsuits in many countries. But these lawsuits never came, RTB is stronger than ever.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from publictorsten@mastodon.social
@wchr It took them years to kill Flash video ads. These were so annoying, that they became an effective campaign for adblockers. Everyone in the ad market lost money, especially Google. But too many marketers did only see short term gains, so Google had to form a "Coalition for Better Ads" to abolish the most self-defeating marketing techniques.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from publictorsten@mastodon.social
@wchr As best possible, get off ANY Google software. Certainly ditch their browser and search engine , the major source of their revenue. Plenty of more efficient and secure browsers available to use.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from yuhasz01@mastodon.social
@wchr Maybe we have reached the point where Javascript needs to be disabled by default and then enabled, with consent, on a site by site basis. #BackToBasics
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from gruff@stroud.social
@gruff @wchr interestingly enough, in 2025 I'm gonna celebrate my own 20th birthday 🎊🎉🎂
[#]interestingtimes
[#]backtobasics
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from noscript@mastodon.social This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini