Google has been rolling out Chrome's “Enhanced Ad Privacy” via a popup

> If the users interest is available via the browser, that would enable smaller sites to do what larger sites do.

And how is that a good thing? The problem is the data collection itself. That larger sites don't directly sell or share the data they collect is better than if they did, but it certainly doesn't make everything OK. The tracking is still happening.

That's the carrot. The stick is it's the first step in a path to neuter cookies. Which hurts all the advertisers, but Google the least.

Browsers are referred to as user agents. They act in favor of users.

I don't care if ads go away or not, but I care a lot about the tracking that ads bring. Getting rid of that alone would remove a whole lot of the problem.

Moving the tracking into the browser itself is not a solution. It just makes the browser into an agent against the user rather than a user agent.

> A big problem that the web has is that it has no standard for micro-transactions

As a user, that's not my problem. And a browser is supposed to be a user agent — acting in my interests on my behalf.

> however, you're a privileged individual that can probably afford to pay for YouTube or whatever else you need, whereas the poor can't afford it.

I can afford it but I have zero subscriptions. Why would I pay for something if I can get an even better experience for free with an ad blocker?

> Fact of the matter is that absolutely all browsers are funded directly by ads

Well maybe we should finally, at last, decide what the scope of the web should be, and stop uncontrollably expanding it into the operating system territory. It helps to remember that a browser is merely a hypertext document viewer with support for macros. Most people still treat it like one.

If browsers could be "finished" without requiring constant maintenance busy-work, maybe they won't need as much funding.

And by the way, the SerenityOS project is building its own web browser from scratch with a small team that runs mostly on sheer enthusiasm (and a whopping $110 000 in donations from two companies): https://ladybird.dev

> The Internet needs valid business models

The commercial part of the internet, which I will not miss the slightest if it goes away.

The 2nd half of this is not correct - only domains whitelisted by Google can use the browse APIs in Chrome. You need to apply to Google with your business's DUNS number to get your domain whitelisted for you website to able to call the Chrome Privacy Sandbox APIs.

Here is the process to apply: https://github.com/privacysandbox/attestation/blob/main/how-...

It's the only browser API I can think of where Google approves, rather than the user (eg: normally, the user is prompted when a website wants to use the browser's webcam or location APIs - in this case, Google handles the approval for the user!)

> No advertiser needs to know anything about me.

They do if they want to deliver ads that are relevant.

> Advertising needs to be put on a short leash with a choke collar until we can kill it.

Kinda proving my point. Nothing in your post actually substantiates why advertising is inherently bad, you just state it as if it's true.

I think there's an ecological angle to it. The more targeted ads can become, the more valuable any individual ad display becomes, and the fewer ads need to be delivered to support the content. People making compelling content with well targeted ads can provide less obnoxious experiences (and they will stand out vs other sites that spam the hell out of your eyes). Basically, there's a dynamic at play where when ads are less targeted, you should expect to see more ads and those ads that you see are all the more "annoying" because they're not relevant.

I really am open to whatever this Privacy Sandbox is about but I just haven't found anything that explains it. The popup I saw actually seemed sort of interesting where it's teasing this interaction where your browser is saying "Hey, you seem to be interested in these things, can I tell ads that you're interested in them?" and I really sort of like that approach. But... I don't understand where that list is coming from, how new items get added to the list after I've reviewed it, etc. I do NOT want to have to POLL some preference page to make sure things I don't want in that list creep in. Or maybe I could explicitly add things I know I am definitely interested in from a list? I'd prefer it was more upfront and asked me each time it found a new one or however it works.

So... I actually see a way this could be empowering to users if done correctly. It's my lack of high-level understanding what is going on and my experience that Google seems to have become mealymouthed lately so I have a base level of distrust. It comes off as yet another "hey you need to stop what you are doing and research something Google's doing to you" again and I don't know if I have the time for that and I have the expectation that it's going to be a waste of multiple hours to try and find any useful info from Google itself. So it may be good or bad but really I don't give a shit about learning about things at the level of a browser implementer. In the mean time it's always easy to just say "No" and nope out of Chrome.

Perhaps if Microsoft allows it into Edge then it's at least been filtered through a Google adversary.

Edit: so I decided to take a peek and yeah of course privacysandbox.com is just your typical Google goosechase. "How does this work?" answers with essentially "We don't know! Go see developer.chrome.com or developer.android.com and see if you can manage to find something there!" Literally linking to the top level of those sites rather than anything useful. Fuck you too, Google.

But this work from Chrome is an attempt at limiting the ability to "hoover up" your data and sell it (ie: this pairs with disabled 3rd party cookies) without killing advertising as a whole.

> That's assuming that targeted advertising is acceptable in the first place. I don't agree that it is.

That was the subject of the entire first half of my comment.

I'm fine with looking for alternatives to advertising, but so far nothing has been successful. People are choosing ads.

Ads are communication. Are you saying that communication is evil?

I regularly see young and naive folks online saying things like "supporting your favorite creators by buying their product isn't capitalism", or "self-promotion isn't advertising". All that cognitive dissonance must really hurt.

Not true if they insert themselves as a middle man in order to help you against third party tracking. Google here is a questionable example of that, uBO (no profit motive that I'm aware of, open source) a probably objectively positive one. But you do have to trust and give some power to middle man to do their thing for you. Nobody needs your consent to not track you themselves, that's true.

I block ads because I don’t want them in my life but I am aware that for some type of content I would need to pay somehow and ads were the currency… In my case when blocking will stop working I will simply stop consuming, get more offline time and so on but to a lot of people that is not an option.

And by simply turning off you mean:

1. Go to: chrome://settings/adPrivacy

2. Click Ad topics

3. Turn off toggle.

4. Click back Arrow.

5. Click Site-suggested ads

6. Turn off Toggle.

7. Click back arrow.

8. Click Ad measurement

9. Turn off toggle.

10. Repeat the same on every computer you have Chrome installed on.

11. Figure out if this is also an issue on mobile browsers installed, and if not, when it will be rolling out to disable it then.

12. Hope that an update doesnt flip the toggles.