In the annals of self-serving security bullsh%$, this is in the top 10:
After promising to offer tools to let users limit “cookies,” tiny files that help internet and advertising companies track users, Alphabet Inc.’s Google suggested it won’t go any further, saying in a blog post that blocking cookies entirely could be counterproductive for user privacy.So, Google is claiming that other sites aren't already using these "nefarious methods", (They are, I'm talking to you Verizon & AT&T), and that it will cost them money, so please turn off your cookie blocker.
The post from late last week has drawn criticism in recent days from some privacy advocates who say Google’s Chrome internet browser should catch up to the stricter practices of rivals Firefox and Safari.
Ad tech companies and some digital publishers are wary of a major crackdown on cookies, saying it would hurt their businesses.
In its post, Google said blocking cookies will encourage the rise of other, more nefarious methods of tracking internet users.
………
“Many folks were expecting Google to do something. When major competitors have come out with a much praised user feature, you can imagine they would come out with something that competes with that,” said Jonathan Mayer, an assistant professor of computer science at Princeton University. “This notion that blocking cookies is bad for privacy is completely disingenuous.”
“I interpret the announcement as giving Google an opportunity to try to show forward momentum on privacy while at the same time not doing anything that would negatively impact its own business interests,” said Jason Kint, chief executive of Digital Content Next, a trade association for online publishers that has argued online tech platforms are harming competition and consumers. Google’s digital ad business uses data on users collected partially through cookies
………
The debate extends to the issue of who benefits financially from browser cookies. Google cited its own research showing that publishers lose an average of 52% of their advertising revenue when their readers block cookies.
The results differ substantially from an academic study published this spring, which found that publishers only receive about 4% more ad revenue for an ad impression that has a cookie enabled than for one that doesn’t.
Google, go Cheney yourself.
*Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?
0 comments :
Post a Comment