Google gets its way, bakes a user-tracking ad platform directly into Chrome

[Karel]

"Chrome now directly tracks users, generates a "topic" list it shares with advertisers."

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/googles-widely-opposed-ad-platform-the-privacy-sandbox-launches-in-chrome/

 

[magic]

IDGAF.

Anyone who wants to block ads can block ads. This new thing can also be spoofed - if a website refuses to work with browsers that don't feed it data about what ads to show, you will load an extension which tells it to show you ads about soldering irons or whatever stuff you aren't too embarrassed about showing up on your screen.

OTOH, countless services are ad sponsored and simply wouldn't exist or would be paid for (another major PITA, in addition to $$ itself) without ads. And targeted adds are a hell lot more efficient than shotgunnning random visitors with random ads.

[Veteran68]

I have absolutely zero problems with the concept of legit and reasonable ads. I fully understand and support why advertiser-supported content is a thing if I'm not paying anything for it. I guess can understand why some people that are holding on to this futile concept of "privacy" have a problem with ad tracking, but they need to accept (if not like) the fact that in today's online world, there's virtually no expectation of privacy for things like this. The internet is essentially a public place, and there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in any public place. So if a marketer wanted to hang out in a public market and write down what flavors of ice cream I like to buy so they can then hand me a flyer for their ice cream, meh, so be it.

Here's what I have a problem with:

* Intrusive ads. Ads that pop-up, over, under, and modal ads that interfere with my ability to access the content I'm after. It's bad enough on a desktop browser but browser extensions and other software can help control it. On a mobile browser where you have fewer if any options, it's especially infuriating where I'm scrolling for minutes reading a long article then the ad refresh timer expires and it reloads the whole page -- from the top. I spend so much time scrolling to where I left off, that the timer is close to expiring again and the process repeats itself. Ads that keep to themselves in a fixed banner, sidebar, or otherwise constrained area that I can ignore if I choose to, I'm fine with. And I'd rather see ads that interest me than totally random and uninteresting ads.

* Deceptive ads, not only the obviously scammy/malware ads, but the ads that appear to offer a legit download button for the content you're trying to access, only to discover it's a cleverly disguised ad button that takes you off the page to some shady service/product. That's the opposite of "legit and reasonable."

* Unskippable or dismissible ads, like video ads, that require me to wait through the entire presentation (or several seconds of it) before I can get on to my business. ESPECIALLY if I'm already paying something for the content (I'm looking at you, movie theaters -- though I realize it's not entirely greed driven since margins for cinemas can be incredibly thin).

If the ad agencies and related companies would better police their ads and enforce some standards, ads wouldn't bother me at all. Even better, offer a paid option to bypass ads, like YouTube Premium, which I happily pay for given the time I spend on YT and how disruptive forced video ads can be.

[50ShadesOfDirt]

Seems easy enough to switch to another browser using the same chrome engine inside, without suffering through the ads ...

in the game of war that is computing these days (vendors on one side, users on the other), one side ups the ad-delivering weaponry, and the other side responds with ad-blocking weaponry.

I used to be able to walk down the street and not get a vendor shoving an ad into my hands every step. Little harder to walk down the internet, and not get *shotgunned* with multiple ads every click. Luckily, the same technology advances, helping vendors to spray users with ads, can be used to effectively block them at many layers.

So, it's those who can't research their way out of the ad box who will suffer ...

I do wish for the opt-in unicorn laws, though ...

[Karel]

I have absolutely zero problems with the concept of legit and reasonable ads.

I do have a problem with it.

I fully understand and support why advertiser-supported content is a thing if I'm not paying anything for it.

I do understand why they try do that but I don't agree with it and I don't support it. If that means that many "free" websites and services will disappear and only
hobbyist/voluntary/sponsored or payed services (including paywalls) will survive, so be it. I can live with that. Maybe that's even better (at least for me).

I guess can understand why some people that are holding on to this futile concept of "privacy" have a problem with ad tracking, but they need to accept (if not like) the fact that in today's online world, there's virtually no expectation of privacy for things like this.

I don't accept that and I will avoid it as much as possible using privacy minded sofware and addons. Also, I stopped using services from tech giants like google.

[eutectique]

I have absolutely zero problems with the concept of legit and reasonable ads.

Like that one? It garnishes this very page (in Chrome, not in FF).

[Veteran68]

I have absolutely zero problems with the concept of legit and reasonable ads.

Like that one? It garnishes this very page (in Chrome, not in FF).

It's somewhat garish with it's animation, but it doesn't bother me or make me not want to visit this site. So yeah, I consider that a "legit and reasonable" ad.