Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google May Replace Cookies With Unique AdIDs

Posted by timothy on from the would-smell-as-sweet dept.

markjhood2003 writes "According to a story published in USA Today, an anonymous source at Google familiar with the plan has revealed that Google is developing an anonymous identifier for advertising tracking, replacing the function of third party cookies currently used by most major advertisers. The new AdID supposedly gives consumers more privacy and control over their web browsing, but the ad industry is worried about putting more power in the hands of large technology companies. Sounds like the idea could have some promise, but at this point the proposal is not public so we will probably have to wait until Google reaches out to the industry, government and consumers to provide the details."

15 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Give consumers more privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or take away their ability to block tracking as they can currently do with cookies? Article doesn't say much about how the new ID is supposed to work.

    1. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or take away their ability to block tracking as they can currently do with cookies?

      That's the basic idea. CNET covered this a few days ago. "The AdID would be transmitted to advertisers and ad networks that have agreed to basic guidelines, giving consumers more privacy and control over how they browse the Web,"

      Expect meaningless, easy to evade "basic guidelines", like TrustE.

    2. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That CNET article is just a summary of the one in USA Today. Both of them are pretty light on information.

      Does anybody know (or at least want to take a guess) how this shit's supposed to work? How do you store this unique ID without using cookies, or something that works just like cookies?

    3. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by StripedCow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Article doesn't say much about how the new ID is supposed to work.

      They closely cooperate with the NSA. It's all give and take.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    4. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anonymous identifier.

      Let's just say that repeatedly until the problem sinks into all of our brains.

    5. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Google has not made the proposal public â" although the company plans to reach out to industry participants, government bodies and consumer groups in coming weeks and months... ... the new tool will give users the ability to limit ad tracking through browser settings... ...The AdID may be automatically reset by the browser every year, and users will be able to create a secondary AdID for online browsing sessions they want to keep particularly private, the person explained.

      It's pretty clear to me this is going to be implemented client-side in the browser, just based on the limited information available. Just like Windows Media Player's "send unique player id to content providers" option.

      Firefox (funded largely by by Google) and Chrome are slightly under 40% market share, and Chrome is increasing.

      All you need is Microsoft on board, or the advertising industry. They won't get the ad industry, so they need Microsoft. Or a plugin for IE that pops up an installer bubble when you use google search, gmail, or youtube. And I'm pretty sure Microsoft is on board, given their media player thing.

      I expect an additional header in the HTTP request. I also expect an uptick in the number of people using a customized FireFox or Chromium that does not send this, or better yet sends a random number (leave the PRNG jokes and asides out of this, that's not the topic).

      You asked for a guess.

    6. Re:Give consumers more privacy? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      THIS is why I'm against it as not only does it rob you of privacy but it DOESN'T EVEN WORK when it comes to targeting ads so its fucking pointless!

      The first time the whole "targeted ads" became a big thing I set up a browser at the shop with ZERO blocking, just so I could see if it actually worked. the results? Its actually WORSE than just picking ads based on what site they are on! For examples when my laptop was getting long in the tooth I decided to get an AMD netbook (as I had tried the Atom and it was painfully slow) so i did a little research and then for nearly 8 months I got nothing but ads for netbooks, long after I had quit searching for netbooks because i had bought one! My nephews use the shop PC only ONCE to find a release date for a game? i got console ads non stop for months, my mom when she came by the shop does a search to find out when the next book in a series comes out? Ditto.

      The sad part is when i blocked all the "targeting" the ads got BETTER because they had only what site i was on to go for! As someone who works retail this whole thing just baffles the shit out of me, basic common sense says if I'm reading an article about SSDs you should show me ads for...drumroll...SSDs! How hard is that? Instead I got ads for car insurance, cell phones, anything and everything EXCEPT what I was fricking reading about and thus shown I had interest in! The only one I have seen do it with any skill at all is Amazon with their "well people that looked at this often buy that, would you like to see that?" and a good 9 times out of 10 yes i WOULD like to see that, as its actually relevant to what I'm fricking looking at!

      This is why I'll block this crap just like I've blocked third party adverts, not because i give a crap if the ad company knows I'm pricing C2D chips for an upgrade for a customer but because the crap doesn't work. in a way it reminds me of the old MSN Search...anybody remember how badly that thing would guess? I'd have just done three searches looking for data storage so you would think when I typed in "D" it would give me data storage as the top option, right? instead it was like word salad, it would spew out "dog, delivery, dollar bills, duck ala orange!" and that is just what the targeted ads do only worse, as it'll ignore what I'm actively looking for and instead either give me ads for something I bought last year or ads for some stupid little thing I looked at once 6 months ago and promptly quit caring about. This entire thing is just dumb, doesn't increase the likelihood of getting a sale, and is generally a giant waste of time.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now how do i block them?

  3. Re:Anyone else smell bullshit? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Google instant search is a keylogger, plain and simple.

    You're obviously presenting only the cynic's side of the argument, but even so, it's even more obvious now than ever that combining the address and search text boxes in a web browser really is a security/privacy risk.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  4. First in line... by Alsee · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh goodie! Another ID number to protect my privacy!
    Can get AdID #1?
    I want to be the first and most anonymous.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  5. Online Advertising is terrible by kawabago · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are always trying to sell me things I looked at but decided I didn't want, or things I already have. They seem to wait till I buy something, then try to sell me more of that. How many potato peelers do they expect me to buy?

    1. Re:Online Advertising is terrible by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't actually have a problem with advertising in general.

      I do. At least the billboard / banner headline compete for eyeballs sort of stuff. Pre-Internet I can see that it had its place in letting people know that products existed. But now there are a plethora of ways that people can get their product known, so it is just one of those pointless activities that the rest of us have to pay for wrapped up in the product we buy, for no added value.

      Which is why I block the hell out off all advertising. When I want to buy something, I research and make my choice. When I am not buying I want products to keep the fuck out of my face.

  6. Ads and Trackers? by utkonos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I haven't seen ads or trackers for a very long time. Every once in a blue moon one slips through my combination of AdBlock and Ghostery, but I always report it so they can add it to the block list. All I see is a little number representing how many cooties were blocked for the page I'm on. Hopefully everyone does something like this and the commercial internet dries up and withers away.

  7. what a choice by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    On the one hand. I have Google. On the other hand, I have the ad industry.

    Eww, let me go wash my hands.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. A third-party cookie by any other name.... by NoKaOi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...would stink as bad. So all it really is is a cookie that's completely controlled by Google. Well played Google, well played.