Avatar

Vincent

Vincent@feddit.nl
Joined
14 posts • 58 comments
Direct message

for the third party services that do the aggregating, which will “sell” (literal quote) the aggregate data

You’re saying you’re literally quoting the ISRG as planning to sell the data? Because that goes directly against what I’ve read about this, which I believe says that they wouldn’t even be able to because they can’t see the data.

permalink
report
parent
reply

So yes,

your definition of “landed” is “someone wrote the code and now it’s in Nightly”, then sure, but why is that a problem?

So why is that a problem?

permalink
report
parent
reply

That only applies to personally-identifiable information.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Advertisers can already easily get this data without this setting, and any measures you take to block ads also by definition affect this setting.

Meanwhile, if this works and becomes widely available, regulators will be able to take measures against user surveillance without having to succumb to the ad industry’s argument that they won’t know whether their ads work.

And yes, this provides data to advertisers, but it’s data about their ads, not about users.

permalink
report
parent
reply

That article is about:

Data anonymization is often undertaken in two ways. First, some personal identifiers like our names and social security numbers might be deleted. Second, other categories of personal information might be modified—such as obscuring our bank account numbers.

Neither of those is what PPA does.

Of course, they’re right that history has shown that this isn’t easy. Hence:

permalink
report
parent
reply

It’s not in release yet, right? If your definition of “landed” is “someone wrote the code and now it’s in Nightly”, then sure, but why is that a problem? If you’re using Nightly, you’re choosing to use experimental features that might not look like their final behaviour (or even get released at all).

permalink
report
parent
reply