Why am I even using this browser anymore?
EDIT: Note this section about privacy goals, from the draft proposal by two Googlers: “Users should be able to understand the API, recognize what is being communicated about them, and have clear controls. This is largely a UX responsibility but it does require that the API be designed in a way such that the UX is feasible.” [1]
I guess it’s just a little oopsie that made the people responsible for the UX present it to the user through misleading copy.
And yet, we've seen many such proposals go through this process because Chrome is paying lip service to it. Whatever Google wants it ships. And Google wants this.
As an adjacent (ads- and tracking-related) example: Google's FLoC flopped, hard. So they immediatey shipped the replacement Topics API [1] despite there being no consensus. E.g. Firefox is against [2] (but Chrome presents Firefox's position as "No signal" in the feature status). And despite the fact that its status is literally "individual proposal, not accepted" [3]
Do not assume any good intent on Google's part when it comes to Google's business interests. Their intent is always malicious until proven otherwise. And there have been fewer and fewer cases when they have been proven otherwise.
[1] https://chromestatus.com/feature/5680923054964736
[2] https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/622
Are you sure? These are third-party cookies, and it's not easy to get a full list. One way to do it is to go to a major publisher (NYT, CNN, etc) with devtools open and networking enabled. Filter to third party requests and look for ones sending cookies. Trying this on the NYT front page I saw 3p requests with cookies to amazon-adsystem.com, doubleclick.net, prebid.media.net, rubiconproject.com, adnxs.com, 3lift.com, openx.net, google.com, scorecardresearch.com, casalemedia.com, pubmatic.com, bluekai.com, adsrvr.org, bing.com, twitter.com, everesttech.net, criteo.com, dotomi.com, bidswitch.net, mfadsrvr.com, agkn.com, pswec.com, adtdp.com, demdex.net, bidr.io, adition.com, brand-display.com, intentiq.com, w55c.net, pippio.com, rlcdn.com, and adsymptotic.com before I got bored and stopped counting. Some of these might not be for personalized advertising, but most of them look like it.
> browsers would be incentivized to implement with good intentions.
Browsers compete on privacy, and what they do is open source. So while their incentives aren't perfect, external groups (and competing browsers!) can help keep them honest by paying attention and calling attention to bad decisions.
A great example of this was Mozilla's thorough and careful privacy analysis of FLoC (https://blog.mozilla.org/en/privacy-security/privacy-analysi...), and looking at Topics (https://github.com/patcg-individual-drafts/topics) Chrome seems to have spent a lot of time addressing that feedback.