Hacker News Reader

Comment by OzzyB | Hacker News Reader

> the entity cannot offer a degraded service

Does this mean that sites that offer free but ad-supported content still have to offer that content? So I can watch those free Youtube movies and listen to those Spotify tracks ad-free because EU Law says fuck you.

How is this fair?

Edit: Okay, okay, non-targeted (and no 3rd party) ads are okay, got it xD

View on HN

Spotify can show you non-targeted or contextually targeted ads, as is done with TV, radio, print media, movie theaters, billboards, etc.

The fact that spotify doesn't want to because it's less profitable is where EU law says fuck you.

You can display ads just fine without using cookies. You just can’t track people across the web.

Also Spotify can easily require a free login and associate everything with that, no tracking cookies required. They just can’t associate your playlist with your web browsing habits.

No, it just means those ad-supported sites cannot use cookies to spy on you in the name of personalized ads. They are still free to display "generic" ads including content-related ads. Same as old school TV, radio and print ads really, which couldn't track me either but sustained those broadcasting companies and publishers well enough.

Billboards, newsletter ads, flyers etc won't track whether you look at them as well, and last time I checked print advertisement still kinda sold.

Tracking is not necessary to show ads. Certainly there are business models which depend on this, but hey who says our society benefits from those? Targeted advertisement and free informed democracies don't mix well IMO.

Especially ironically, Facebook has been taking out newspaper ads to whine about how it needs targeted advertising to survive, and how mean Apple is harming them.

Those ads will just have to be served without the tracking. You know, like how it has worked for decades on television and radio.

How does no 3rd party tracking without consent mean "ad-free"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com