this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
321 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3195 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This episode of Security Now covered Google's plan to deprecate third party cookies and the reaction from advertising organizations and websites.

The articles and the opinions of the show hosts are that it may have negative or unintended consequences as rather than relying on Google's proposed ad selection scheme being run on the client side (hiding information from the advertiser), instead they are demanding first party information from the sites regarding their user's identification.

The article predicts that rather than privacy increasing, a majority of websites may demand user registration so they can collect personal details and force user consent to provide that data to advertisers.

What's your opinion of website advertising, privacy, and data collection?

  • Would you refuse to visit websites that force registration even if the account is free?
  • What's all the fuss about, you don't care?
  • Is advertising a necessary evil in fair trade for content?
  • Would this limit your visiting of websites to only a narrow few you are willing to trade personal details for?
  • Is this a bad thing for the internet experience as whole, or just another progression of technology?
  • Is this no different from using any other technology platform that's free (If it's free, you're the product)?
  • Should website owners just accept a lower revenue model and adapt their business, rather than seeking higher / unfair revenues from privacy invasive practices of the past?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 76 points 9 months ago (5 children)

So, internet users may soon need to create accounts on sites they currently access for free. As Laporte worries, "We thought those cookie permission popups were bad, but things may be getting much worse" regarding being forced to hand over personal information just to browse sites.

Good way to kill your site, this is the one thing everyone hates, from the enthusiast to the casual user, making an useless account for 1 service that you barely use.

[–] mr_satan@monyet.cc 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Slap Google SSO on that and you're good. Honestly that's worse than regular registration.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 35 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, if I see a "register an account on this random website" I roll my eyes or close it/back out. If I see "sign in via Google/fb" I recoil with a "fuck no".

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I initially was ok with it, but as I have watched these companies I have become less and less ok. I have been contemplating making dummy accounts full of erroneous data so all of the metrics are wrong as a giant middle finger. Sure, I'm a 72-year-old woman in Des Moines, or am I an 80-year-old man in DC? Maybe a 22-year-old in LA? Who knows.

[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I have a trash google account I made for android emulation and I just use that for those kinds of things.

The only time I check that mailbox is to click verify links.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 9 months ago

Decentralized SSO on the other hand has the potential to be both convenient and privacy respecting.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Especially considering all the data breaches that you hear about.

[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Hi, I work in IT, for every big profile data breach you hear about, there are 4 that never make the news.

[–] kayazere@feddit.nl 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

On mobile it is pretty common to force the user to create an account before being able to use the app, so people may already be trained on it.

[–] Andrenikous@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Probably what google is banking on. The world relies so heavily on the internet that if every site required sign in there is very little choice people have besides just not using the internet.

[–] labsin@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

If they need permission for third party cookies and those are now no longer possible, the popups can go already.

And if a site doesn't want to serve people that do not accept data hoarding, an account with terms and conditions is the only logical way to go.

Belgium forced facebook to not track users without an account and they reacted by doing this exact thing (requiring an account to even read pages). It made it a lot easier for me to not having to deal with Facebook at all. If some store or organization only had the info on Facebook, I'll just tell them I can't access it 🤷‍♂️

[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

It's already fucking bad enough when they popup a newsletter sign up halfway through the article.

I'd pay fifty bucks every time to have the person who made that design decision slapped in the face with a haddock.