Thanks. I know you're not OP, but I'll take this opportunity to answer anyway.

privacy preserving attribution

...is not as bad as many people think.

The best argument that I believe still has merit is this:

All websites on the internet—including ad networks!—are guests on our computers, and the content they provide are merely suggestions for a user agent to interpret and show us how it chooses.

If you agree with this—and I kinda do—then yeah, PPA shouldn't exist. You're probably a staunch user of uBlock (or uMatrix) and don't want your browser engaging in any privacy-preserving attribution shenanigans.

But here's the kicker: if you use uBlock, PPA won't do anything. It can't, even when left enabled. For the API to be called, ads need to get to your browser first, and uBlock doesn't allow them to get that far. The only people really affected by PPA are people not using adblocking, i.e. the people being tracked all over the web, who would likely benefit from PPA.

As I said in a previous comment: if PPA works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it'd be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock. That doesn't mean I'll stop installing it on every device I can; I'm simply accepting that'll never be every device on earth.

And for all that Mozilla is implementing "bullshit," they're also the only ones keeping uBlock 100% functional by maintaining manifest V2. They spend time and resources protecting the very thing that trumps their supposed bullshit. That feels not like enshittification to me, but a group trying its best, even while stuck between a rock and a hard place.