Mar 26, 2020

I've got a piece on Chrome privacy sandbox published on Search Engine Land.

“At this time the most comprehensive model for on-device is the “Privacy Sandbox” from Google Chrome. Currently, this exists as a set of “explainers” or draft technical specifications, most of which are still under discussion or otherwise likely to change. However, the underlying concepts and objectives certainly reveal the approximate destination.

A Potential Privacy Model for the Web provides a great starting point to understand the ideology and intention behind the decisions made around the Privacy Sandbox. So, what is it?”

Jul 31, 2019

I'm cited in this MediaPost story announcing the release of sellers.json and SupplyChain.

Jul 23, 2019

I have a short quote in AdExchanger.

Jul 05, 2019

I'm quoted on

“We're working on collaborating with browsers to find solutions that put consumers at the center,” Sam Tingleff, the IAB Tech Lab's chief technology officer, said. “We think there's a reasonable middle ground to do so and enable better overall user experiences.”

I mean, that's basically the same as a prime time interview with Lester Holt, right?

Dec 03, 2017

I find it difficult to see this GOP tax bill pass and not become incredibly pessimistic about this country's future. Deeply unpopular Congress aims to pass deeply unpopular bill for deeply unpopular president to sign says it all.

We have an extremist minority party serving a voting constituency of all of about 10 people. Whether we are descending into authoritarianism, kleptocracy, oligarchy, or whatever… clearly the situation we find ourselves in is one of taxation without representation.

One wonders if the voters who put these assholes in power - ignore Trump for the moment - are getting what they want.

And still, this tax bill on the face of it does not make a lot of sense politically. At most 30% of Americans like it. Yet some senators have been remarkably honest about whom it is intended to serve.

The only rational explanation which makes sense to me is this one.

It's an interesting - and terrible - situation. The pessimistic case is that they are true believers of supply side economics as the one true religion of the GOP. And perhaps that's true for some members of the party.

The optimistic case is that the GOP is fucked, knows it, and will not win another legitimate election for 20 years. The tax “reform” bill is a last gasp F-U to America in an attempt to preserve their own wealth and their donor's wealth for generations.

Aug 11, 2017
Aug 07, 2017

I've been thinking about civil disobedience in the modern era.

We have a party which maintains power through a huge variety of fuckery and they're not about to give up on the obsolete or corrupt institutions like the Electoral College which keep them in power. They will do everything they can to hold on to power through dirty tricks like gerrymandering and voter disenfrachisement.

They lie through their teeth constantly through social media platforms which provide a massive, free platform to spread the message.

At the same time, their leadership spits out anti-science nonsense of all kinds: climate change denial, maths denial, science denial within the EPA, vaccine denial, forensic science denial, etc etc.

One could reasonably say that you do not get to deny science in one realm yet benefit from it in another.

If you do not believe in the reality of climate change, should you really get to benefit from the science which designed and built the iPhone? If you think that vaccines cause autism, should you really have access to mass communication platforms like twitter, which are built on decades of scientific and technological innovation? If you think encryption (math) is something which can be regulated and restricted, do you really have a right for your email to deliver over SSL?

So, what might a scientist or engineer do as an act of civil disobience towards a party of science deniers? Here's a couple of ideas.

  • On a user registration page, ask the question “is climate change a hoax?” and deny access to any positive respondent.
  • Disable SSL when serving any content (login forms, private communications, or other) to Amber Rudd and any supporters of encryption legislation.
  • Introduce subtle and annoying bugs to @GOP leadership using your product built on social media APIs.
  • Use sentiment analysis to discover anti-science nonsense and tag it with a very visible bullshit 💩 label.

The fact is that we (technology providers) are enabling these assholes yet are under no obligation to do so. And to be clear, I'm not arguing against free speech. But if you're anti-science, the intellectually honest thing to do would be to live with the Amish.

Apr 14, 2017
Mar 31, 2017
Mar 17, 2017