And you're saying that all of those big brands refuse to use profile data acquired by fingerprinting, even if it would allow them to microtarget their campaigns? So they're essentially valuing people's privacy over their own profits? Somehow I highly doubt that.

I'm not saying that what you're saying is false. I just think that in an industry with highly shady and consumer hostile practices, built on the core ideas of psychological manipulation, that needs to be regulated to stop violating people's right to privacy, and even then finds ways to tip toe around regulations, it's quite unbelievable that all of a sudden they have a change of heart and actually claim to care about consumers. I mean, you're a part of it, so forgive me if I instinctively distrust your claims, and the claims of your clients.

> Literally all of them want privacy focused advertising

So they're running ad campaigns without targeting user profiles at all, in the same way advertising is done on traditional media? Because that's the only "privacy focused advertising". I highly doubt this as well.

Again, privacy and advertising are part of a zero-sum game. Advertising profits increase at the expense of user privacy, and the more targeted campaigns are, the more profitable they are. It would be foolish to think advertisers and adtech companies would be willing to sacrifice their profits out of the goodness of their hearts. This is why we need regulation in the first place, because they're not capable of self-regulation, and will pursue profits at all costs. But this is nothing new, and big business has been exploiting people since the dawn of industry. So please don't try to frame advertisers and adtech as some kind of benevolent actor.