Brit watchdog thinks Google's tweaked Privacy Sandbox still isn't cricket Google so far has lived up to its commitments to make room in its Privacy Sandbox for rivals, though the UK's Competition and Markets Authority says a number of concerns still have to be addressed before the web giant's ambitious advertising technology gets its blessing. The Privacy Sandbox is Google's name for a set of …
I work in ad tech. 3rd-party cookies definitely help us in many ways.
But also, non-Chrome browsers have already blocked 3rd-party cookies for years, and we've been just dealing with the lack of those signals, fine.
The amount of effort that Google is putting into "ok we're going to remove 3rd-party cookies but also kinda come up with a weird bundle of replacements which are shitty versions of what we think people want 3rd-party cookies for and also rework how RTB auctions work in Chrome" is just suspicious.
If they actually cared about privacy+tracking they'd just say "we're gonna do like Safari and just disallow that" and then everyone would have to deal with Chrome as we deal with Safari. Instead there's this opaque system, controlled by Google, which they pinky-swear has no backdoors or other ways for Google to get to keep all of your info.
I really, really can't buy the idea that this isn't a subtle land grab by Google that they're trying to sneak by regulators. Just say "no one gets 3rd-party cookies" and be done with it.
I have conflicted thoughts on this. Privacy is gaining traction in my world and then I am learning just how the web finances itself and works. I don't like it but understand that how it pays for itself. But what I have seen traffic from ads and telementary from my OS and Google slurping data and the kick back against encryption (In the uk snoopers charter).
And then there is web 2.0 or is 3.0 and a brave new world of opt in rather than included by default and no idea.
I agree stupid idea this will push me away from google.
We all can see adds as we search for something and it keeps popping up everywhere adds in videos etc etc
It is too much I won't , or rarely , take any notice of them but the bandwidth and data that flows must be very signifcant.
This explains it well https://youtu.be/JJ0St6OmTp0?feature=shared
My 2p!
This is plain simple circumvention of GDPR dressed as do-gooding-privacy feature but actually doing the opposite.
Google will no longer have to spend money on building user profile on their end and offload it to user computer - essentially theft of computer resources.
No concern about that from useless CMA?
CMA should have slapped this out of the Google filthy hands, but instead they are appeasing.
The CMA aren't "appeasing". They're raising their concerns in a pretty pro-active way for a regulator. Rather than waiting until the deed is done, then studying it, then saying "oops we shouldn't have allowed that".
They might be preparing to appease in future, but we can't know that. Plus they should get the credit for at least publicly doing the work now.
Also, the CMA aren't a privacy regulator. They're a competition regulator. So they're much more interested in Google abusing its market dominance, having a browser, search and mobile phone OS monopoly.
Google the advertising broker should not be part of the same company as Google the browser developer, Google the operating system supplier or Google the search engine. They are fundamentally conflicted. Any regulatory regime that had the interests of anyone but Google at heart would break them up.
-A.
For advertising to be more useful than dropping leaflets from a plane in a hurricane, you need to be able to send the right advertising to the right audience.
Advertising could restrict itself to only sending advertising to individuals that want to receive such advertising and that have provided enough information about themselves to make useful advertising targeting possible, but as in all other industries they want to increase their productivity
The only way that advertisers can take control of their own productivity is to not be constrained by any consent limitations in the acquisition of personal data or their capacity to insert advertising in any and all communications media.
Privacy and informational security are completely incompatible with the needs of the advertising industry.
Or, you could just target based on the content of the web page, and maybe the country the visitor is from?
Like in the past, adverts for floppy disk drives would go in a computer magazine, adverts for lipstick would go in a women's magazine, and adverts for stock brokers would go in the Financial Times.
@johnrobyclayton
The whole problem of targeted advertising is that it is not.
Some shoddy algorithms based on my browsing history think I'm interested in purchasing "X".
Generally I'm not e.g. have previously researched "X" online, and subsequently either purchased it or decided it is not for me.
Classic example is "big ticket white goods" - I'm only interested in a fridge (or whatever) when current one is broken beyond financially viable repair and so a "distress purchase". As its a fairly important bit of (in this e.g. kitchen) kit, I research what's on offer then buy one ASAP (likely to buy in bricks & mortar shop with stock of that item as can get the "distress purchase" home faster that way).
Generally the ads "lag" the research phase, so in this e.g. by the time I start getting fridge ads, I have already purchased one.
The best "targeting" is to serve me ads that reflate to the contents of the web page I am reading at the time, not (badly) guessing what I may be interested in*.
* lots of my interests do not involve online activity, so ad slingers are clueless about e.g. the books I read, my hiking and wildlife watching activities, the sports I play, the clubs / societies I am a member of etc. The "interests" of mine that do leave an online footprint are ironically, those that are quite low down the "pecking order" of my interests. e.g. I'm interested in tech (hence el reg) but I enjoy e.g. hiking outdoors (whatever the weather) a lot more than being stuck in front of a screen. .
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
