back to article Google ready to kick the cookie habit by Q3 2024, for real this time

Google's delayed disposal of third-party cookies – data stored in web browsers for advertising and analytics, among other things – will kick off the third quarter of 2024. The ad biz intends to press ahead with its Topics API for interest-based advertising, despite being told by the Technical Architecture Group (TAG) of the …

  1. katrinab Silver badge

    The alternative is advertising content based on the content of the site rather than the visitor.

    1. DJO Silver badge

      The horror!

    2. elsergiovolador Silver badge

      Imaging visiting a car forum looking for what kind of tyres people buy for their whip and then seeing advert of a tyre shop rather than another scam site offering loans just because you were searching for business grants earlier.

      1. Neil Barnes Silver badge

        Even better: our car forum has run for over twenty years with no adverts whatsoever.

    3. v13

      You can still disable it. At least that's what the proposals say.

      1. ThatOne Silver badge

        That part will remain a WIP I guess...

        1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge

          No doubt it'll be THAT engineer who left the SSID sluping code on the Google maps survey vehicles who'll be working on this part of the code

      2. gandalfcn Silver badge

        "Google ready to kick the cookie habit by Q3 2024, for real this time" Anyone believing G00gle needs medical help. In fact, why use G00gle?

    4. Arthur the cat Silver badge

      The alternative is advertising content based on the content of the site rather than the visitor.

      How about no advertising? Works for me.

      1. Chet Mannly

        I mean websites could produce content that is so good it's worth paying for.

        Radical idea I know!

  2. Lis Bronze badge

    You know

    it really pisses me off that advertisers can use my internet connection to send me the equivalent of junk mail. They should be paying me. How is this even legal? They are leeching off my pipe. I wouldn't care so much if the few adverts I see were even distant cousins to my interests.

    Fucking parasites.

    1. ChoHag Silver badge

      Re: You know

      You connect to the web server. You make the request. The server gives you what you ask for.

      Perhaps don't ask?

      1. b0llchit Silver badge

        Re: You know

        It is called an ad blocker...


        and add noscript too

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: You know

          More and more sites are detecting the use of Adblockers etc.

          If those sites won't let me in without disabling the ad blocker then I give them the finger and go elsewhere.

          I hate ads... all ads.

      2. jmch Silver badge

        Re: You know

        "The server gives you what you ask for."

        No, the server gives what you ask for and then independently asks another server to also send you a bunch of stuff you didn't ask for.,

        1. ChoHag Silver badge

          Re: You know

          The process is quite simple.

          You direct your computer to connect to a server and ask it to perform a process and send you a result, which it does.

          That result contains instructions which can direct your computer to repeat the process recursively, which you permit it to do.

          Don't do that, or don't complain that it happens when you do.

          Or simply put, as it was above, use an ad blocker (and don't visit cancerous websites).

      3. gandalfcn Silver badge

        Re: You know

        "The server gives you what you ask for." Who paid you to post that?

        1. ChoHag Silver badge

          Re: You know

          All of the clients over my career for whom I have built and maintained such servers.

          Who pays you for the telemetry that you send to them?

    2. Chet Mannly

      Re: You know

      And now Google wants to implement an API to run ad auctions on your device. They are just taking the p*ss at this point...

      1. ChoHag Silver badge

        Re: You know

        Now? What did you think that pile of javascript that you already run on an advertiser's behalf was doing?

  3. Neil Barnes Silver badge

    A cookie by any other name

    would no doubt taste as sweet, but might sneak by a regulator.

    1. Lil Endian Silver badge
      Black Helicopters

      Re: A cookie by any other name

      It wouldn't get by Susan Jebb! (Did she get confused between cookie law and the munchies?)

      [Icon: She's coming for your cookies!]

  4. elsergiovolador Silver badge


    If the effect is going to be the same as if there was a cookie, then are regulators dumb?

    1. zuckzuckgo Silver badge

      Re: Effect

      PRO: It should prevent 3rd party advertisers from tracking the websites you visit and stop them inferring your interest from those visits. Instead the browser specifies topics to be used to filter ads.

      CON: It does not prevent 1st party tracking and gives the browser supplier and owners of large diverse internet properties (cough - Google / Chrome - cough) more control and power over advertising revenue. Might eventually be used as justification for banning ad blockers.

      Unclear (to me at least) if users get to control the list of topics or if browsers are allowed to infer them.

      1. v13

        Re: Effect

        > Unclear (to me at least) if users get to control the list of topics or if browsers are allowed to infer them.

        The proposals say that the topics are configurable and that there will be an option to disable personalisation.

    2. v13

      Re: Effect

      It isn't the same because all the personalization happens on your own device. Your browser infers that you're interested in buying cars and tells the site, so the site serves car ads. The sites no longer need to set tracking cookies and no ad providers know where you have been before. It also has some anonymisation and configuration tricks so that you can control topics it disable the personalization, and so that you don't always send the same interests.

  5. Graham Cobb Silver badge

    What is the effect in EU and UK?

    My (limited) understanding is that the reason I see cookie popups is not because they are cookies, but because tracking my interests requires my explicit agreement. If so, isn't this Google API required to get my permission (which I will refuse) in exactly the same way as cookies do?

    Or is there something special about cookies, which Google believe this new API gets around?

    Of course, in the UK, I am sure there is some corruption which will mean the government decides to "simplify" the rules making this new API legal. But in non-corrupt countries will this achieve anything for them?

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: What is the effect in EU and UK?

      If it does, I'm sure NOYB will end up bringing a case.

      1. Graham Cobb Silver badge

        Re: What is the effect in EU and UK?

        Yep. And a reminder to anyone who isn't a member that NOYB is happy to accept members from outside the EU, if you want to support them. Although they don't take on any actual non-EU cases, their wins are often useful to those of us outside the EU to show what needs to be done.

    2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

      Re: What is the effect in EU and UK?

      > But in non-corrupt countries will this achieve anything for them?

      Could you give an example of such a country ?

    3. gandalfcn Silver badge

      Re: What is the effect in EU and UK?

      "some corruption " In Westminster? Shirley Knott!

      " Officials at the government’s spending watchdog are examining the controversial decision to provide £220,000 of taxpayers’ money to fund Boris Johnson’s legal defence for the inquiry into his Partygate denials. Meanwhile, No 10 refused to say whether Rishi Sunak knew of complaints about Dominic Raab’s alleged bullying before appointing him to the cabinet."

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What is the effect in EU and UK?

        Never met a Shirley Knott. But I do know a naughty Shirley.

  6. low_resolution_foxxes

    Out of curiousity, does this mean Android/Chrome will stop allowing Google cookies, or they will stop using cookies for all internet traffic?

    What will happen to all the spammy click happy/cookie companies that try and save their spammy cookies on my browser? Will that all come to a crashing halt?

  7. Knightlie
    Thumb Down

    Until users can choose their own interests rather than have the likes of Google and Meta/Arsebook analysing everyone's browsing history, all this shit gets blocked. Although I use Vivaldi anyway, so I'm not that fussed what Google does. Fuck 'em.

    1. ThatOne Silver badge

      I'm pretty sure they won't leave free rein to all the Chrome clones, Firefox and Safari.

      They will surely devise some method to force them to adopt the new system, because not doing so would mean losing quite some money.

    2. gandalfcn Silver badge

      I like Vivaldi. And Ecosia.

  8. Wade Burchette

    Google's new proposal

    Google's new proposal sounds like a way to track people that will be harder to block. Clearing cookies is, at worse, a minor inconvenience. Clearing browsing history can make finding a website you visited harder to find again. This can be a major inconvenience. Yet, that is one of Google's proposals, to track you based on your browsing history. You just know it will turned on by default, with the off switch buried deep in the bowels of the settings where few people ever look.

    The internet went from luxury to necessity before all this creepy tracking. If those ads worked once, they can work again.

    1. Neil Barnes Silver badge

      Re: Google's new proposal

      I wonder how it will work in pr0n mode browser windows? A change to delete this tracking history at the same time?

      At the moment, private windows are pretty much the only sane way to browse the internet, not logged into anything.

  9. UCAP Silver badge

    OK, this looks like it could be easy to disable

    Looks like the whole sandbox privacy thing is based around a series of JavaScript APIs that can be called by embedded scripts inserted by the Ad slingers. Noscript should be a pretty simple way of disabling that, backed up by Adblock just in case something slips through.

    1. jilocasin

      Re: OK, this looks like it could be easy to disable (not so fast)

      Google's already anticipated your next move. It's probably one of the main driving forces behind Manifest V3. Remember, that's the change to plugins that will lobotomize ad blockers and in all likelihood keep plugins like NoScript from working at all.

      If this goes through, your only hope will be to find and use a web browser that hasn't been contaminated by this drivel, or tempted by the lure of ad dollars and Google kickbacks.

  10. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
    Big Brother

    Isn't long past the time to...

    kick the GOOGLE habit?

    Go on.... You know it makes sense.

    Google is [see icon] and we all know it.

  11. Chet Mannly

    It's a hell no from the Australian judge...

    So basically this 'privacy sandbox' will just create a local Google ad agency on my device - not only mining my data to determine my interests and broadcasting interests to advertisers, but also conducting the ad auctions on my own freaking device.

    Not content with chewing up bandwidth for all these years, now Google want to chew up gobs of my CPU and power to essentially run their ad business on my device?

    P*** off.

    1. Fred Daggy Silver badge

      Re: It's a hell no from the Australian judge...

      And there in lies the rub. They make the ad business and the browser. (near) Monopoly power.

      What better way to corporatise the profits and socialise the costs than to make the users PC do all the leg work. And Googlebet get the revenue.

      (Do i hear black helicopters in the distance?)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like