Right now the document does a good job of listing good and bad uses for IP, though it doesn't explicitly list them as such. Given that there might not be universal consensus on which is which, it's hard to draw a hard line - but it would still make the document easier to follow. I propose that we tweak the structure to say:
IP are used for two classes of features: tracking and anti-abuse
there are new systems being developed that are focusing on preventing tracking but are not aimed at providing anti-abuse
therefore we should discuss how IP is used for these and what replacement signals exist
That would give us the split discussed above by leveraging statements of facts about existing products instead of basing the split in opinion. I'll write a PR to show what this looks like.
Right now the document does a good job of listing good and bad uses for IP, though it doesn't explicitly list them as such. Given that there might not be universal consensus on which is which, it's hard to draw a hard line - but it would still make the document easier to follow. I propose that we tweak the structure to say:
That would give us the split discussed above by leveraging statements of facts about existing products instead of basing the split in opinion. I'll write a PR to show what this looks like.