Thread · 6 tweets · 22 Aug 2019

It's good to see the Chrome team finally start down the path to catching up on privacy, but this announcement would be a lot more credible if it contained fewer dishonest statements. Is there a chance we could get a more truthful update? blog.google/products/chrom…

Specifically: * Admitting that other browsers were onto this much sooner (not "recently"), had to face substantial hostility from the Chrome team (as well as behind-the-scenes intimidation from Google), and have produced solutions worth more than "unintended consequences".

* Being open about the fact that the Chrome Team actively blocked the path to standardisation for ITP, so that talking about relying on standards today is an about-face. Browser vendors have a tradition of being open about their mistakes, let's not lose it.

* It has been the documented Chrome policy for years to not try to attack fingerprinting. It would feel a lot more honest to note that rather than claim Chrome is swooping in to fix someone else's unintended consequences.

* The paragraph about "funding for publishers falls by 52% on average" from lack of targeting is a direct lie and simply bad science. It looks at the wrong counterfactual to make a self-serving statement. Please just remove it.

Don't get me wrong I am very happy that Chrome is finally coming to the table and will be looking closely at their contributions. But a bit of humility when you change your mind and come last to the game would be welcome -- and more promising.