Thrawn wrote:@Guardian: It will still support third-party cookies in theory, but with them disabled by default, who is going to turn them on? Hardly anyone will both know how, and choose to do it. And if only 1% of browsers support them, then no site can rely on them and they are basically dead.
Of course, there is the workaround: once a site sets a first-party cookie, it is allowed to set third-party cookies. But that strengthens the argument that this won't work. Third-party cookies indicate deliberate collaboration; sites that want to collaborate will just have to use more redirects, that's all.
I still think the way they are going about it is the wrong way. Just because a bunch of people may jump on the band wagon, doesn't mean its the right, or most efficient way of doing things. I think Fx has progressively gone from bad to worse with each move they have made. We thought rapid update cycling to match google was bad, but this is just asinine. Workaround or not, why make people's lives more difficult instead of making it easier and giving them a choice? Say what you will about M$ but Mozilla is in my opinion becoming far worse than M$ ever was and they have been labeled the "secure, privacy conscious, open, and alternative option" to big corporation, yet, here we are from Fx 2 to 2x10 and progressively worse.