- From: benjaminsavage via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 03:42:36 +0000
- To: public-patcg@w3.org
If I were to "Steel-man" the complaint, here's how I'd interpret it: - None of us want to wind up in a situation where the browser ONLY approves one set of helper parties who can charge exorbitantly high prices. - None of us want to wind up in a situation where the browser vendor demands some kind of favors / preferential-treatment from the helper party in exchange for approval to operate a helper node. But those aren't the only concerns. There are also legitimate privacy concerns: - None of us want to wind up in a situation where *untrustworthy* or *incompetent* parties are able to operate helper nodes. This could lead to two bad-quality helper nodes colluding, and user-privacy being compromised. So what we need is a set of *fair* and *objective* requirements on helper parties. These requirements should ideally lead to a good number of qualified parties - such that there is healthy competition that brings down prices for advertisers and publishers. But it should be a rigorous enough bar, that the browser vendors can confidently tell the people who use their products "We have confidence in these helper parties - and your privacy will be preserved." -- GitHub Notification of comment by benjaminsavage Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/patcg/patwg-charter/pull/47#issuecomment-1413109912 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 2 February 2023 03:42:38 UTC