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?
  • iquanyin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    just to say, it’s about 95% less full of harmful chemicals. even opponents admit that. vaping is safer. not safe but safer. and unlike the 200+ times i tried to quite over 45 years (hypnosis, gum, patch, groups, acupuncture, and a heap 'cold turkey), it took me just a few years to quit by first switching to vapes. and within a month of the switch, i felt better in every way. all the bs restrictions in place are so dumb.

    • RedFox@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m glad that helped. Was it the ability to dose down intentionally that helped?

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It’s also more addictive than tobacco. Which isn’t saying it’s not safer. But the vape ROA hits the brain faster than smoking. This reinforces the addiction cycle more effectively. One of the reasons crack cocaine is so fucking addictive. It’s vaped cocaine.

      • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        No the other way around. Smoking hits you very fast, almost instantly because it’s very fine particles that pass into the bloodstream. Vaping is much slower because it’s vaporized droplets that get absorbed slowly through mucus membrane, and it’s less effective (like 50% effective after 30 min vs. 100% after 5 min). Nicotine salt e-liquid “improves” that a bit to hit faster, to help people stop smoking. You can find articles and papers on this.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Huh… I was basing this info off huberman labs episode on nicotine. He’s usually very accurate (he’s a neurobiologist and a professor at a major university)