Gregory's Server
@Schouten_B For the record, I am not at all interested in making advertisers happy here. They had their chance to do the right thing and they completely ruined it for everyone. I'm done with that.
Advertising existed loooong before conversion tracking or widespread individual surveillance was ever a thing. Let's go back to that. Ie, authors working directly with advertisers to sell content-based placement. That system was fine actually. Don't act like ending surveillance would destroy online advertising, because it totally won't.
Also, if making your feature opt-in would destroy the benefit of that feature (to you) because people wouldn't want to participate, then take a moment and reflect on why that is. And when the answer is obvious actually, and you push the feature on us anyway, don't get all surprised when we get pissed about it.
@cuchaz Well the reality is advertising companies are paying for all the content that vast amounts of people are consuming for free. (For better or worse, that's a fact, the sun comes up for free.. Beyond that.. Not so much)
I don't think the value of the feature to Firefox is not destroyed by fewer participants. From the perspective of Firefox there is no impact from the amount of participants. The way the math works is fewer participants has an impact on the users of the feature. Not Firefox