Cookies make Google money (targeted ads ect.) so obviously they are not doing this without a replacement system. I expect them to start abusing fingerprinting even more than they already do.
What was funny about me asking for an explanation?I use Brave with several addons so I'll have to find Firefox addons like those again for it.
Haven't used Firefox for many years, but it was and is a superb browser.
Why'd you stop commenting?What was funny about me asking for an explanation?
Because unlike you, I don't get validation from Internet strangers. I comment when I feel the need to, not because I have nothing better to do in lifeWhy'd you stop commenting?
You're the one who went liking my comments. lmaoBecause unlike you, I don't get validation from Internet strangers. I comment when I feel the need to, not because I have nothing better to do in life
Still waiting for an answer BTW
You're the one who went liking my comments. lmao
No interest, you're a stalker.Delusional. I appreciate your interest in my activity but keep your digital hands to yourself, please. And maybe answer questions.
Some members in this forum do like this and you can do is ignore them.What was funny about me asking for an explanation?
No interest, you're a stalker.
Some members in this forum do like this and you can do is ignore them.
If anyone give reaction, even laugh and sad, you gets higher reaction score.
and it is unnecessary to throw revenge on someone for give laugh reaction - just ignore them.
If you actually still want an answer to your initial question, Google's main revenue streams are their advertising services. In large part they have a near monopoly on advertising on the internet and if anyone wishes to run their ads they often have to go through Google. The more targeted and custom tailored an ad can be the more effective that ad is, and as such the more value it has. Third-party cookies have long been a sort of semi-public way how every advertising company on the planet has created a profile for any given user to more effectively target them with ads. Since everyone had access to them the playing field was ethically questionable but "fair". This change however tips the scales massively in favor of Google as now they control what other advertisers can read out from any given user, effectively allowing them to either monetize it directly (they sell access to that information how they see fit), or by simply hurting the other advertising companies and forcing the companies buying ads to buy their spots from Google instead. Similarly sites that may have relied on advertising from companies other than Google may have to switch to Google to make ends meet as advertisers start going with Google Ads even more.Delusional. I appreciate your interest in my activity but keep your digital hands to yourself, please. And maybe answer questions.
While they make this sound like a positive change for people, and it maybe to some extent as fewer companies will get as much data, Google has never shied away from exploiting or creating a market opportunity. This will not be any different.
Correct, see also their https-pushing agenda, and their sponsorship of Mozilla (firefox then being useful in their anti-Microsoft approach, now a puppet rival to downplay their dominant position)Google has never shied away from exploiting or creating a market opportunity. This will not be any different.
OK so which browser is safe?Correct, see also their https-pushing agenda, and their sponsorship of Mozilla (firefox then being useful in their anti-Microsoft approach, now a puppet rival to downplay their dominant position)
From what?OK so which browser is safe?