Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Chrome Privacy United Kingdom

Google Makes Pledges on Browser Cookies To Appease UK Regulator (reuters.com) 29

Google has pledged more restrictions on its use of data from its Chrome browser to address concerns raised by Britain's competition regulator about its plan to ban third-party cookies that advertisers use to track consumers. From a report: The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been investigating Google's plan to cut support for some cookies in Chrome - an initiative called the "Privacy Sandbox" -- because it is worried it will impede competition in digital advertising. Alphabet's Google has said its users want more privacy when they are browsing the web, including not being tracked across sites.

Other players in the $250 billion global digital ad sector, however, have said the loss of cookies in the world's most popular browser will limit their ability to collect information for personalising ads and make them more reliant on Google's user databases. Google agreed earlier this year to not implement the plan without the CMA's sign-off, and said the changes agreed with the British regulator will apply globally.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Makes Pledges on Browser Cookies To Appease UK Regulator

Comments Filter:
  • NO!!! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Coookie Monster ( 6527100 ) on Friday November 26, 2021 @03:07PM (#62023857)
    No cut support for cookie!!! Me love cookie!! OM NOM NOM NOM...
  • by darkain ( 749283 ) on Friday November 26, 2021 @03:10PM (#62023861) Homepage

    This entire article reads like we're living in the worst of both worlds.

    "We don't need privacy because companies that profit off of exploiting individualized data would be disadvantaged"

    • by evanh ( 627108 )

      For the moment, correct. However, since ads work just fine without any tracking of the individual, there isn't an actual requirement for them to do any tracking at all.

  • Cookies are last thing on the web I would be concerned about. I'd be much more concerned about third-party JS and surreptitious crypto mining.
    • Because they know that if the simple client-side tracking disappears, they can tap into the inevitably more complex server-side, continuous tracking systems that develop.

      Currently the cost factor is a big issue in the latter, but you make cookies disappear, the alternatives becomes a lot more palatable. Government knows this and wants to tap into it as well.

      The Facebook tracker instead of a file sits in a persistent module loaded into your computer and simply tracks ALL pages, regardless of their cookie pol

  • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Friday November 26, 2021 @03:26PM (#62023893)

    Alphabet's Google has said its users want more privacy when they are browsing the web, including not being tracked across sites.

    Google, your users want more privacy, period. Nobody buys your posturing. Everybody knows you don't give a shit about users' wants and needs. If you really cared, you would just fuck off and stop invading people's privacy altogether. Assholes.

    • "Privacy is dead. Get used to it"

      -- Larry Page
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's sad that every article about anything Google related immediately devolves into this kind of bollocks. It's impossible to have a grown-up discussion of the issues. In this case there is actually something interesting to talk about, but it gets drowned out by the Google hate.

      I think some people honestly believe that Google really is recording every move they make online. That's how far divorced from reality the debate is now.

  • For the end user, none of this makes any difference as far as how the internet works.

    If you are an advertising company, you're going to tell everyone that this destroys the internet as we know it, because it changes their perspective.

    For the standard business, they'll purchase whatever advertising is affordable and legal. It is debatable whether or not this affects them even slightly.

    If the US isn't going to take privacy seriously, then I'm glad to see the rest of the world giving it a shot. You are either

    • According to the summary, the UK leads the way.

      • by jd ( 1658 )

        The UK has, in the past, led the way on many an invention and discovery. I would question whether it is currently capable of doing so.

  • The Do-Not-Track header must be respected.

    It is an option feature of browsers and often hidden away, so anybody that has it set shows a clear indication that the person doesn't want their personal private data process/stored.

    This needs to be explicit law since the majority of companies actually ignore this this.

  • Any non-profit will verify this.
  • by kmoser ( 1469707 ) on Friday November 26, 2021 @10:41PM (#62024707)
    Google: "We're going to track everyone!"
    Everybody else: "Bad Google! Stop tracking us!"
    Google: "Ok, we're going to stop tracking everyone!"
    Everybody else: "Bad Google! Some companies want to be able to track everyone!"
    • That part you're missing is that they're not offering to stop tracking anybody, they're offering to use their browser to block the means that others use to track people, so that they can be even closer to an advertising monopoly.

  • ...advertising agencies absolutely must see everywhere we go on the internet or the sky will fall down? Advertising will be fine without it. The biggest problem isn't Facebook & Google either, it's ISPs. They get to see & record everything regardless of cookies unless we pay for a reputable VPN & Google, Facebook & everyone else buy it from them. A more effective solution than tinkering with web browser policies on users' computers is to ban commercial user profiling. Profiling citizens is t
  • To hell with them wanting to "track" the usage of people online! i hate online ads!
  • I for one is glad they will soon be unable to or have more difficulty to track us. As an example about a year or two ago I was shopping for a new vibrator because it keeps on disappearing and reappearing and with empty battery. No, do not even ask. Off topic. Anyway after I purchased a new one for my vibrator thief everyone in the house and friends who had used our internet suddenly started to get ads for sex toys. When I was in her age it would have caused me damage knowing how many people knew someone in

news: gotcha

Working...