|
|
|
|
|
|
by millsmob
1894 days ago
|
|
|
“attempting to explain to the public what they are doing” The idea that you can explain FLoC, third party cookies or any other digital advertising technology to the public is crazy talk. Ad tech is extremely complex and constantly evolving - “the public” includes children, the intellectually disabled, the mentally ill, the elderly and the illiterate. No amount of documentation is going to help these people reach a point where they could actually be considered as giving “informed consent” to their “use” of an ad-tech stack that often involves dozens of different legal entities and software components. ##### “why it is not a threat to privacy” The entire purpose of FLoC is to maximise profit for Google by minimising my privacy. |
|
|
Only me, but I actually find the docs insulting for the reasons you stated.