"Cookie blocking does not undermine web privacy. Google’s claim to the contrary is privacy gaslighting." https://t.co/is89eUHnOZ

— Abeba Birhane (@Abebab) August 23, 2019

The @googlechrome proposals include some potentially significant proposals for ways to do ad targeting, attribution, and even fraud/security w/o needing to individually track users across websites.

Lets hope the engineers convince the risk-averse lawyers https://t.co/x7wav10O9f

— ashkan soltani (@ashk4n) August 23, 2019

Today's update to your privacy theory vocabulary is brought to you by @jonathanmayer & @random_walker.

Privacy Gaslightinghttps://t.co/N3YhrNb3l7

— Evan Selinger (@EvanSelinger) August 24, 2019

I did think it was odd that this point was missed out of the press coverage I saw about this news. https://t.co/qyM418DRLa

— Martin SFP Bryant (@MartinSFP) August 24, 2019

"Traffic for which there was no cookie present yielded an average of 52 percent less revenue for the publisher"

Consistent with our analysis more than a year ago: https://t.co/aC7hHIQidI@WibsonOrg #OwnYourData https://t.co/SpkRGRhute

— Mat Travizano (@mtravizano) August 22, 2019

Another example of smart people at big tech companies losing the moral and ethical forest for the trees. It's easy to get so wrapped up in the complexity of the enterprise that a small series of defensible arguments add up to an unjust result that you just can't see. https://t.co/6Yg24248qC

— Blake Reid??‍♂️ (@blakereid) August 24, 2019

While we support the Chrome team's efforts to improve people's privacy, for any of it to be effective, they really have to make privacy protection the default.https://t.co/uIoM36yzBv

— Firefox ? (@firefox) August 22, 2019

Google just made a long-awaited announcement on Chrome's approach to privacy. Sadly it is full of excuses for *not* doing tracking protection, including the absurd claim that blocking cookies is bad for privacy. @jonathanmayer and I deconstruct the claims: https://t.co/jOc0Usk8xB

— Arvind Narayanan (@random_walker) August 23, 2019

ah I see google are up to their same old tricks again 'oh no but chrome needs this data to serve relevant ads!' chrome's malware, don't use it https://t.co/sXwPNUZ6AG

— dan nolan (@dannolan) August 23, 2019

"If history is any indication, launching a standards process is an effective way for Google to appear to be doing something on web privacy, but without actually delivering." A bit more in depth than my initial snark on why this is tone deaf    https://t.co/zTWF0c9xrn

— Mary Branscombe (@marypcbuk) August 25, 2019

It would be better for *Google* if people used Safari and Firefox instead.

Using other browsers will force Chrome back towards open standards.

The ad team will hate it. The engineering team will love it. https://t.co/HY0RlPSOmI

— Rene Ritchie (@reneritchie) August 24, 2019

It’s good that Google now wants to standardise techniques for more privacy-preserving ads (even if we and others proposed many of them a decade ago https://t.co/n9Rq0S13wH ?) 1/2 https://t.co/MH6UPOgUK2

— Ian Brown (@1Br0wn) August 23, 2019

Wow. This is an outstanding analysis of Google’s misleading announcement by blog post yesterday. I’m going to stop debating press coverage that ran with it (simply because Google said it) and instead recommend they all read Arvind’s post ASAP. https://t.co/dGu4XpLUnY

— Jason Kint (@jason_kint) August 23, 2019

Deconstructing Google’s excuses on tracking protection. Who thinks that Google wnts to protect the user privacy doesn't understand their business model. https://t.co/Zoaot0he3K

— Frank Karlitschek (@fkarlitschek) August 25, 2019

"Cookie blocking does not undermine web privacy. Google’s claim to the contrary is privacy gaslighting."https://t.co/XQ9RZNHbfg

— Jonathon Colman (@jcolman) August 25, 2019

How Google tries to argue that cookie blocking is bad for privacy in stead of being honest and say it is bad for Google’s business. Get rid of Chrome and use ⁦@firefox⁩ Safari ⁦@cliqz⁩ or ⁦@brave⁩ https://t.co/ONvqeIYPvx

— Pernille Tranberg (@PernilleT) August 25, 2019

Yesterday Google published a blog post explaining why Safari & Firefox are bad browsers for trying to block trackers & 3rd party cookies because ad platforms will use more aggressive tracking techniques.

I guess they must have inside info. ???https://t.co/lsBKIk4FVW pic.twitter.com/7yUDNZ9NN6

— Dare Obasanjo (@Carnage4Life) August 24, 2019

Don’t believe the bullshit propaganda Google feeds you… about itself. https://t.co/30mUKD7vAs

— Thomas Fuchs ? (@thomasfuchs) August 24, 2019

Google's transformation from the "Do no evil" champion of the users, fighting the evil Microsoft empire, to becoming the evil empire itself, is complete

It's now arguing that blocking cookies is bad for privacy https://t.co/ypfeLRnN58

— Navin Kabra (@ngkabra) August 25, 2019

추적 보호에 대한 Google의 변명 https://t.co/kq3XEjyrLY
• Google이 개인 정보 보호가 역효과를 낳을 것을 암시하는 불성실한 주장을 한 것은 이번이 처음이 아닙니다.

— editoy (@editoy) August 26, 2019

"cookies were not supposed to enable third-party tracking, and browsers were supposed to block third-party cookies. We know this because the authors of the original cookie technical specification said so (RFC 2109, Section 4.3.5)."https://t.co/T4qgEaM4KH

— oomu (@oomu) August 25, 2019

Deconstructing Google’s excuses on tracking protection https://t.co/ts0n91AEye

— Rich Tehrani (@rtehrani) August 25, 2019