I've been thinking a lot about this proposal, and I've been trying to understand the potential motivation of Google and how the situation could potentially play out to provide Google with an advantage.

• Google have proposed a technology that replaces the tracking functionality provided by cookies, by tracking users based on their loose membership of cohorts.
• The technology is not generalised - it provides specific utility to advertisers.

• Google has presented this technology proposal as a potential open-source specification. Google gains an advantage by participating in the open web. There's not much chance of this technology being accepted by the open-source community. I would surmise that this is expected by Google; if it feels obvious to me, I'm sure it feels obvious to other people.
• Other browser manufacturers have rejected FLoC already.

• The advertising industry is likely to be very keen to adopt this technology.
• Chrome is the dominant browser used on the web.
• Chrome already provides a number of APIs and features that are Chrome specific. Google tries to continue to support the concept of an open web, by proposing ratification of these specifications via the W3C. Regardless of this behaviour, the existence of technologies prior to an agreed W3C specification, could be seen to provide a marketing advantage to Chrome.
• A browser manufacturer stands to gain benefit from locking an audience into their specific browser, as it will increase their market dominance. This was obviously the main motivation behind Microsoft going rogue with Internet Explorer 6.

• If advertisers make use of FLoC, they're likely to want to ensure that their audience use Chrome, so they can continue to monetise their content. I can see a world where sites that use advertising ensure their site only functions on Chrome.
• Apple has it's own closed ecosystem. Facebook has it's own closed ecosystem. Google would end up by fully dominating the open web, as it's own closed ecosystem.

If this scenario develops - how can we ensure the open web is not destroyed?