Good explanations, the parallel and history perspective on Palladium is right. It's the same fight than 20 years ago, it shows up its ugly head regularly. Time to collectively say no once more.

The FSF words are strong but deserved in this case. Let's hope it marks the beginning of an efficient campaign against this move from Google.

I was indeed thinking this looks awfully similar to some things we've seen in the past... It needs to be fought as well.

More details and analysis about the events unfolding around the Google "Web Environment Integrity" proposal. This still doesn't bode well. Whatever they claim it seems clear it's about getting rid of ad-blockers.

This is a welcome consequence of the CJUE ruling. Be warned, think twice before reaching for Google Analytics.

It smells a bit like hypocrisy isn't it? On one hand they claim it can make developers more productive on the other they think they shouldn't use it.

Maybe it's time to make so called "reinforcement learning from human feedback" actually humane? It's not the first account along those lines in the industry.

Training sets are obviously already contaminated... now it'll be a race of hiding such mistake under the carpet with human interventions. That'll be a boon for misinformation. That's what we get for a useless large models arm race.

Excellent piece as usual from Cory Doctorow. It quite clearly point out why Google is anxious and running off the chatbot cliff

Or why you can't trust large language model for any fact or knowledge related tasks...

I agree, I don't get why Wikipedia gets bad reputation in school. I'm dismayed at then whatever bogus argument they have being used to push for using Google instead... it's like, back in the days, asking pupils to not use the encyclopedia they maybe had at home and walk into the nearby pub to find information.

We all know you shouldn't use Google Analytics. Now we also know that if you're in Europe and you're using it, it's probably illegal.

Debatable "feature", bad implementation, dubious community handling... Clearly not a good example to follow from the Go space.

Or why browser monoculture is bound to become more and more of an issue. Sad to see Mozilla's weak response to this move. Can't bite the hand that feeds I guess.

Despite the problems with Mozilla's politics and funding, this is the main reason why I use Firefox as my main browser (even on my smartphone). We can't have a monopoly on which organization influence the web standards... unfortunately we get fairly close from that position.

The "Apple is better at privacy" argument was looking really like a fallacy to me. And indeed, it's getting clearer that it was greatly exaggerated...

Google came with another crap idea and not everyone has to adjust their web servers...

So talking about the devil being in the details... That confirms profiling is still very much in the picture (unsurprisingly) but more disturbing:

• this has implications which creates new venues for easier fingerprinting (so extra risks!)
• this is in fact not that hard to cross-reference cohort and user identity (oops, wasn't it main initial motive to prevent this?)
• thus, this will help with monitoring behavior changes over time

And of course that's to be added to the fact that targeted advertising is very much not going away. FLoC or third party cookies... pick your poison I guess?