[esturk]

Look at the OP's profile. Manager at Pinterest. Theres no doubt the attack is disgenuous because said individual have skin in the game.

I usually don't mind if they disclose it upfront. But to hide it and present an argument as neutral is dishonest.

[jack9]

What attack? The Adtech Ecosystem is incestuous, corrupt and penultimately complicated. jwegan is technically correct and savvy enough to understand one of many problems with this kind of fluff announcement. The least of these problems is a strawman reaction that anyone who dismissed it, is a bad actor. New SDKs are born every day. Apple CANNOT PRESENT a new technology that isn't a variant of what already survives in the ecosystem (i.e. insufficient other than to add another paid product that doesn't work any better). If Apple wants to go outside the IAB standards, it's another attempt to "take over" or can only be used as an Apple "internal" tool.

Here's a disclaimer: I worked at multiple Adtech companies in senior engineering positions.

[Razengan]

Still not seeing any reason as to why it’s bad for users.

[jack9]

Adding another lie to the stack has the same consequences as before. More bloat in the sites and higher costs across the board.

[jwegan]

I'm not trying to hide it. Like you said it is right in my HN profile.

I don't work on Pinterest's ads business and I'm not very familiar with that side of the company. I'm speaking as someone who runs ads on other sites to try and drive traffic to Pinterest.

Also, like the other poster said, an ad-hominem attack is a classic logic fallacy. You are criticizing who is saying it and did not bring up a single critique of my actual argument.

[ghayes]

Please be less ad hominem and speak to the merits of the conversation. Does it matter if the OP has skin in the game if the merits of the argument have real value?