• Mindlight@lemmy.world
      24·
      1 year ago

      Ads?

      “Hi, I’m calling about your recent interest in furry related content. We at Furry Fetish inc recently mailed you a catalogue of our products… Oh…you haven’t recieved it yet? Well, no worries. It was sent to 324 North Street…oh… You live on 325 North Street? No worries, your name is printed in large so whoever received it knows that is was for you and will probably deliver it to you…”

    • monsoon@kbin.social
      20·
      1 year ago

      Interest based ads that everyone who has connected to the same wifi as you will now see. And it’s not just interest based ads. They will use this to calculate your whole personality and manipulate you and others based on that.

  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pubEnglish
    294·
    1 year ago

    Google’s new ad system is called Topics. If you want to understand how it works, I would like to point you to Security Now Ep 935 in which Steve Gibson gives a pretty thorough analysis.

    Marcus’ take in the image is overly simplistic and a bit FUD. The intention is for Topics to replace current ad tracking systems such as tracking pixels and other metrics. In conjunction with implementing Topics, Google is removing third-party cookies from Chrome, which will eliminate most of the current invasive tracking tools.

    I’m not really a Google fanboy and I’ll probably just stick with Firefox personally, but everything about Topics sounds less privacy invasive than the way things are done now. If Google can force this change on the internet advertising market it will actually be an improvement for user privacy.

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      41·
      1 year ago

      It’s not overly simplistic. It’s simply not a privacy feature if the core functionality is sharing your data. Privacy is if they stopped sharing data. Sharing more data is antithetical to privacy.

      • StudioLE@programming.dev
        7·
        1 year ago

        The transparency of Topics is at least an improvement. Previously you would be targeted - or rather discriminated - by highly questionable traits.

        Hopefully with this move regulators will finally step in to outlaw the previous behaviour. That would be a minimal step in the right direction.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          4·
          1 year ago

          I doubt it. And I see no reason to believe Google is not going to continue that behavior, especially for those using a different browser.

      • FoxBJK@midwest.socialEnglish
        31·
        1 year ago

        Yes but this is local to your browser and you’ll be able to edit and/or clear it out if you choose.

        It’s not perfect, and I’m aware of which community this is, but this is vastly better than 3rd party cookies.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          5·
          1 year ago

          You say that as if clearing out cookies isn’t also a thing one can do. All they’re doing is opting you into more directly handing them your data. And I didn’t see any mention that cookies will be discontinued by them anyway.

          In the end, the big problem here is that it’s being routed as a privacy feature when it’s anything but. It’s just a different kind of privacy violation.

          It’s simply not about privacy so it shouldn’t be labeled as such.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pubEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        Theoretically, Topics doesn’t track anything beyond general interest categories (e.g. fishing, shoes, technology, dancing, etc) and would replace current data collection systems for targeted ads. If actually implemented as described, it would result in the ad market collecting and sharing less data on users. Basically, Topics is a step in the direction that you’re talking about.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          3·
          1 year ago

          I only see evidence that this replaces FLoC, but not cookies. Even Google’s statements about what cookies and data they collect hasn’t changed. This is a Chrome specific capability. Topics replaces Federated Learning of Cohorts which didn’t use cookies either.

          Edit: nevermind. FLoC was a technology that allowed ad data to be collected even when third party cookies are disabled. Essentially it allowed chrome to collect data that Firefox and Safari already blocked when third party cookies are disabled.

          So this isn’t replacing cookies at all, just FLoC. And it’s not replacing something “worse”. It’s still totally something that Chrome is collecting without cookies or any need to do so.

    • exohuman@programming.dev
      24·
      1 year ago

      So with Topics and the removal of 3rd party cookies Google can then have a monopoly on behavior based ad tracking since they also have 64% of the browsing market. This is also bad.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pubEnglish
        2·
        1 year ago

        This is absolutely the big problem. Google already has a near monopoly on internet advertising, with Facebook/Meta being their only real competitor. If Google has full control over the interest tracking/targeting technology and it’s inescapable because it’s part of the browser engine then they are effectively the gatekeepers of all internet advertising. Meta could still operate as an advertising agency but wouldn’t be able to implement any of their own technology, they’d have to just use what Google allows them to.

        Definitely bad, but is it worse than tracking pixels (which came out of Facebook Beacon)? From an end-user privacy sense, I think Topics might be better as it doesn’t keep track of your specific web activity, only general interest categories for the websites that you visit within a period of three weeks - and the record is kept locally in your browser, not on a corporate server.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          2·
          1 year ago

          It’s not part of the browser engine. It’s part of the browser “chrome” (part of its namesake), the thing around the browser engine. So this isn’t in Edge and goes without saying, it isn’t in Firefox etc.

          It’s still bad. Chrome is still a popular browser.

          Edit: it does keep track of your browser activity, just doesn’t share the whole bunch of data with their parties.

    • Knusper@feddit.de
      6·
      1 year ago

      Other browsers have been blocking third-party cookies for quite a while, so I cannot imagine any ad network which doesn’t already have alternative solutions in place and is therefore simply given more identifying data by this system. If Google genuinely wanted to change the ad model, they’d block tracking scripts by default.

  • owlinsight@lemm.ee
    221·
    1 year ago

    I mean…yeah? Is anyone surprised or shocked when Paramount Pictures releases a new movie? It’s literally Google’s whole business idea, they sell your data.

  • Knusper@feddit.de
    16·
    1 year ago

    Title says “enhanced privacy” and text says they’re handing out more data to websites…

  • TrekHuis@feddit.nl
    142·
    1 year ago

    Worst part, my adblocker is removed from Chrome, have to use a system wide adblocker now. Enjoy corporate world!

    • Zerush@lemmy.ml
      63·
      1 year ago

      Ad/trackerblocker are inbuild in Vivaldi, customizable with own filterlists, even blocks Cookie Advices and Anti Adblock warnings in Desktop and Mobile. I can use Extensions from the Chrome Store, but no really need them, most extensions are redundant in Vivaldi.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      111·
      1 year ago

      Nothing, and they don’t claim it is, they just use ambiguous wording.

      “Enhanced ad privacy features”. The ads are enhanced. Privacy is just involved.

      • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
        3·
        1 year ago

        you see, they respect the fact that you are a poor slob and there is no point advertising BMWs, large TVs and individual pillows to you. So they are making you less miserable about all the stuff you cant afford which is somewhat nice to your privacy isnt it?

  • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.eeEnglish
    8·
    1 year ago

    Because they know that wording it like:

    “We use our monopoly advantage to push anti-consumer features nobody wants. Enable extra tracking for no reason? Yes/no”