I have DoNotTrack set and my browser blocked several tracking scripts from their site.<p>As for the problem, it really comes down to making money: Data is sold to inform targeted adverts. An additional requirement is that the ad company needs to know how much to pay the ad host. Also remember that ad blockers came about mostly as a result of reducing web bloat and reducing the fight for the users attention.<p>Nobody in their right mind would agree to this without some sensible solution in place. Servers cost money to run and content is usually not free to create.
It seems weird that they would ask survey respondents to check their browser settings to determine if they had Do Not Track enabled. DNT status is transmitted over HTTP headers, and is available to JavaScript. Couldn't they have just checked DNT status automatically to get more accurate data?
Pretty much the low hanging fruit of PR efforts.<p>Propose a legislation that has zero chance of ever coming into effect and then watch as all of your target audience pat you on the back for all the great work.<p>Problem of course is that this isn't how legislation gets passed in the US. Especially these days when you have Democrats, Republicans and the President all with completely different stances on privacy. And of course a 2020 election with a President who is relying almost exclusively on digital marketing and would be hurt by this legislation.<p>If this was a SuperPAC with a high profile lobbying firm then you could take all of this a little more seriously.
Great way to promote themselves. DDG is growing like crazy, although I had to switch back to Google after half a year with DDG because search quality is nowhere near that good.<p>On the other hand, the Democratic Party seems eager to stick it to the Silicon Valley, so they may at least use a similar proposal as a way to negotiate with the big tech.