So after years of profiting from the dark practices cookies allowed they decided to replace them with something new, better, more powerful, and potentially harder to block (when they decide to make it mandatory or burry it so deep that the average person can’t find the off switch).
Are we supposed to be grateful now? Are we expected to celebrate this as a “huge win for the end user”?
This looks like a typical case of “fighting symptoms, not the cause”.
We don’t know whether Apple’s apps will ask yet do we? Not until the next iOS update.
And when an app doesn’t ask, does that just mean there is no tracking going on or is it some nefarious scheme to achieve who knows what?
The nefarious option will probably become most popular on the interwebs, obviously. I can already see the HN posts: “Pages caught loading an asset from apple.com, violating their own tracking policy! Is Apple doomed?”
The norm is already getting to be 2 unskippable pre-roll ads, the creator’s sponsor read (not uncommonly > 3 minutes long), several badly timed mid-roll ads, and a post roll ad.
The ads themselves are mostly repeats to the point that I’m getting an aversion to the companies and products they try to sell.
Goolgle is clearly hoping to get more consumers on YT premium but that’s just priced too high IMHO.
Well, that doesn’t sound like a well thought out software architecture does it. What did they do to get 2 completely separate applications mashed up together so badly that it “costs billions” to untangle?
If we would always think about “what could go wrong” and decide whether to go forward based on that we still wouldn’t use fire today.... in order to make something safe we need to make it work first. No guts, no glory.
- Analysis that is not shared to review
- Data that is not shared for review
- Broad assumptions that are quickly narrowed down to "facts"
- There is "more evidence but we can't show you because.... reasons"