W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > March 2012

Re: ISSUE-111 - Exceptions are broken

From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 09:14:41 +0100
To: Kevin Smith <kevsmith@adobe.com>
Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Message-ID: <7323926.FrFFtCWIQE@hegel.sophia.w3.org>

On Thursday 08 March 2012 14:34:58 Kevin Smith wrote:
> Yes - which is the only important part of exceptions, because again, the
> exception exists because the 1st party wants to know what content to show
> the user.  The 3rd party has no value by itself.  It is only included to
> provide value to the 1st party.  If the 1st party cannot make the content
> decision, then there is no reason to request an exception - it will treat
> the user as DNT:1 and 3rd parties are completely irrelevant.

I agree, this is important. How can we solve that use-case without creating a 
privacy incident? Because so far, as you remarked, the service can't see 
whether I block the http requests to third parties. This has numerous probs, 
but we must overcome them to create the right incentives. Because there are 
two possible outcomes if it works:

1/ Services use this to install paywalls for those not looking at very 
privacy-invasive advertisement. 

2/ If in scenario 1/ users will go away instead, we will see services looking 
for reasonable monetizing third parties that are acceptable to users. 

This looks like a market to me. And markets are always best to find out the 
optimum unless they are seen to be defunct (like for apartment rental in 
France ;). But we can't know if this market is defunct if we haven't tried it 
out. Again, difficult. 

Your take, Kevin.. ?

Received on Friday, 9 March 2012 08:15:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:46 UTC