I guess I just prefer to take the optimistic approach to things like this :). I see it as another way for the browser to tell me, a site owner, if something got through that wasn't supposed to. My immediate thought was for better defense against an evil script. Yes, the evil script shouldn't have come up in the first place, but that doesn't mean I'm perfect and an evil script will never make it onto my site.
Aside from disabling misuse of features, it also uses the Reporting API [0] which means that toxic ads violating the feature policy can be reported to the site owner and then potentially removed. That's what I would do if I were a site owner pushing ads -- check on my side to make sure they aren't doing anything questionable and address it immediately if it is.
> How about you just do your job as a site owner and employ an ad network with a code of conduct/morals?
How would this prevent a bad actor from making an ad that looks safe but isn't?
Aside from disabling misuse of features, it also uses the Reporting API [0] which means that toxic ads violating the feature policy can be reported to the site owner and then potentially removed. That's what I would do if I were a site owner pushing ads -- check on my side to make sure they aren't doing anything questionable and address it immediately if it is.
> How about you just do your job as a site owner and employ an ad network with a code of conduct/morals?
How would this prevent a bad actor from making an ad that looks safe but isn't?
[0] https://w3c.github.io/reporting/