Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Technology

Amazon is Blocking Google's FLoC (digiday.com) 50

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
Amazon is blocking Google's controversial cookieless tracking and targeting method. From a report: Most of Amazon's properties including Amazon.com, WholeFoods.com and Zappos.com are preventing Google's tracking system FLoC -- or Federated Learning of Cohorts -- from gathering valuable data reflecting the products people research in Amazon's vast e-commerce universe, according to website code analyzed by Digiday and three technology experts who helped Digiday review the code. As Google's system gathers data about people's web travels to inform how it categorizes them, Amazon's under-the-radar move could not only be a significant blow to Google's mission to guide the future of digital ad tracking after cookies die -- it could give Amazon a leg up in its own efforts to sell advertising across what's left of the open web. Further reading: Nobody is Flying To Join Google's FLoC.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon is Blocking Google's FLoC More

Amazon is Blocking Google's FLoC

Comments Filter:

  • Every year or two (Score:5, Insightful)

    by locater16 ( 2326718 ) on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @09:55PM (#61491822)
    Google asks itself "What could we hawk as a 'web standard' that would give us de facto control over the entire internet?"

    I wonder what protocol or standard they'll try for next

    • Re:Every year or two (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @10:21PM (#61491862)
      They've gone all Microsoft-of-old. They don't try to build industry consensus, not even try to consult external expert opinion. They just plough ahead and assume everyone wants to buy in because they're Google, and therefore run by by Googlers, the bestest people on Earth because they pass some gruelling hiring process that doesn't test for useful stuff like common sense.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • Maybe they should stop delivering relevant advertising based on the individual and instead match it to the associated page content. Less money for them, but also far less invasive.

    • Remember when Microsoft was the one who did this and Google was the scrappy underdog/good guy?

    • Re:Every year or two (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @02:42AM (#61492222) Homepage Journal

      I see you have no idea what FLoC is.

      The basic concept is at least an attempt to do the right thing. Stop cross-site tracking by removing features such as 3rd party cookies, and provide an alternative for sites that rely on ad revenue that in theory protects the user's privacy. That includes protecting it from Google, there is no advantage for them with FLoC.

      The problem is that it falls down on the privacy part. It has to, otherwise it couldn't allow targeting of ads. They tried to exclude categories that could be sensitive, e.g. that reveal things about the person's sexual orientation or medical issues. Unfortunately it's poorly implemented and still leaks huge amounts of information.

      Rather than waste their time trying to make an inherently invasive thing private, they should concentrate on helping sites survive in a post-targeted ad world.

      • Rather than waste their time trying to make an inherently invasive thing private, they should concentrate on helping sites survive in a post-targeted ad world.

        I don't see how there's even a difference. Google properties routinely try to sell me infant diapers. No one in this house is capable of pregnancy. Targeted, untargeted, they're thoroughly irrelevant.

      • So basically replace one ad-tracking mechanism with different ad-tracking mechanism...how is that better?

        I routinely search for stuff that isn't relevant, just to screw with them. Maybe it has an effect, maybe it doesn't, but I like to think it does.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          FLoC tries to stop the tracking, it just doesn't work.

          My recommendation is

          UBlock Origin
          Privacy Badger
          Privacy Possom
          Cookie Auto Delete
          Disable third party cookies entirely

    • Re:Every year or two (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @02:51AM (#61492236) Homepage

      Google asks itself "What could we hawk as a 'web standard' that would give us de facto control over the entire internet?"

      Just to be clear, for anyone who has missed these:

      • QUIC - let's replace TCP
      • SPDY - let's replace HTTP
      • FLoC - let's replace cookies

      All of these are designed to give Google an advantage. The existing protocols are not broken - they do not need to be replaced.

      • Re:Every year or two (Score:4, Insightful)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @04:18AM (#61492310) Homepage Journal

        The existing protocols are not broken but that doesn't mean they can't be improved on. The current HTTPS/TCP situation has some issues with both privacy and performance.

        I have no problem with Google proposing ideas to become standards if it is done openly and there is a decent review process. That seems to be the case with FLoC - public review has deemed it DOA and even if it does become a formal standard nobody will use it. If anything it proves that Google doesn't control the internet and can't force things on us.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      They've done it a few times now - SPDY, NaCl, PNaCl, VP9 etc. Mostly this is to address some deficiency in standards or performance. And sometimes they succeed or the intention becomes something equivalent but portable, e.g. PNaCl -> WebAssembly. But in FLoC's case there is absolutely no technical incentive for browsers other than Chrome to implement it.

      I'm sure there might be some financial incentive, e.g. Google might wave some dollars in front of Firefox / Opera to persuade them to plug users into t

  • down with FLoC

  • Choices, choices (Score:5, Funny)

    by Drishmung ( 458368 ) on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @10:17PM (#61491856)
    "Step right up, see the cage match of the century. Two fighters enter, only one leaves. Now, place your bets!"

    "Can I choose neither please?"

    "Not an option. Choose one! Make your choice!"

    "Can I have my liver pecked out daily by an eagle instead?"

    "That's going to happen regardless of which one wins. I repeat, place your bets..."

  • The enemy of my enemy is... (Score:3)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Tuesday June 15, 2021 @10:29PM (#61491872)

    no, I can't get that to work here no matter how much I try.

    But in this specific case, I'm leaning in Amazon's direction.

  • I hate to side with Amazon, but...

  • Competitors competing? So.

  • And Amazon tracks *EVERYTHING*. It may ask the browser nicely not to track your interests on Amazon web sites, but need I remind you how well it works when you use the "do not track" header to ask advertisers like Google not to track you? It's like you didn't even ask. Or do you not get asked whether you want some tracking cookies right after you've sent that header?

  • Amazon doesn't want to support a competitor's technology. What a shocker that is...

  • Get Floc'd (Score:3)

    by labnet ( 457441 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @02:13AM (#61492182)

    What do you expect when Google tells the world to get Floc'd

  • i still have chrome installed but ONLY use it for gmail and youtube, google is just too much of a dataminer, i dont need them collecting data on all my internet browsing habits, i dont know what all firefox (mozilla) collects, and i dont like being "the product" of high tech snoops
  • Advertising / tracking cookies suck but FLoC is even worse. The browser "learns" someone's browsing habits through some opaque system, assigns them to a "cohort" and then tells every site what that cohort is. So a person could visit a website for the first time ever and the site already knows more about them than they ever intended to divulge. Or they could visit a site where they have an account and suddenly the site can combine all that with the knowledge they know.

    It sucks big time. I hope the whole sy

  • Kinda Gross... (Score:3)

    by EndlessNameless ( 673105 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2021 @08:50AM (#61492784)

    Do I really have to cheer for one abusive corporate monopoly to defend my privacy from another? I don't have a sufficiently pithy-yet-biting statement to convey my disgust.

    But let's be real: Google tried to do an end-run around EU cookie regulations. It didn't fail because of the power or foresight of the regulator. It failed because someone else wanted to keep their user surveillance to themselves.

  • The web is still open. It's working perfectly. I can put up a web site and it works fine. I can submit it to search engines and people can find it, one way or another.

    If you want to buy or sell advertising, that's a different issue. If you want to sell stuff, that's a different issue. If you want to put web-backed apps on cell phones, that's a different issue. None of that has to do with the way the web works.

    • I can submit it to search engines and people can find it

      You can submit it, but people aren't going to find it unless you spend a lot of money or have hundreds of social marketing buddies to push it for you.

      There was a time when search engines (especially Google) were much less biased against small time websites and would happily turn up a thread on some tiny random forum where people were discussing exactly what you searched for, instead of pushing you to major players.

  • If you want to download the free solutions of class 8th Science subject in free of cost then you should visit here on this website. class 8 Science ncert solutions [fullncertsolutions.in] This is an awesome post for the students.

Slashdot Top Deals

Things equal to nothing else are equal to each other.

Close