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?
  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    11 months ago

    So, internet users may soon need to create accounts on sites they currently access for free. As Laporte worries, “We thought those cookie permission popups were bad, but things may be getting much worse” regarding being forced to hand over personal information just to browse sites.

    Good way to kill your site, this is the one thing everyone hates, from the enthusiast to the casual user, making an useless account for 1 service that you barely use.

    • kayazere@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      On mobile it is pretty common to force the user to create an account before being able to use the app, so people may already be trained on it.

      • Andrenikous@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Probably what google is banking on. The world relies so heavily on the internet that if every site required sign in there is very little choice people have besides just not using the internet.

    • labsin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      If they need permission for third party cookies and those are now no longer possible, the popups can go already.

      And if a site doesn’t want to serve people that do not accept data hoarding, an account with terms and conditions is the only logical way to go.

      Belgium forced facebook to not track users without an account and they reacted by doing this exact thing (requiring an account to even read pages). It made it a lot easier for me to not having to deal with Facebook at all. If some store or organization only had the info on Facebook, I’ll just tell them I can’t access it 🤷‍♂️

    • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s already fucking bad enough when they popup a newsletter sign up halfway through the article.

      I’d pay fifty bucks every time to have the person who made that design decision slapped in the face with a haddock.