In my case, I don't use an ad blocker, but I do use Privacy Badger, which is only supposed to block tracking, and should only block ads if they can't have their tracking disabled. It looks like Privacy Badger decided "pagead2.googlesyndication.com" should now be blocked as a tracking domain.
Perhaps Google should split off their nonpersonalized ads service into a different domain so such services can easily distinguish between the two?
Actually, this is something that should be fixed in Privacy Badger. They can detect the URL parameter that flips ads from personalized to non-personalized (npa=1) and block accordingly.
https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/2046
"use cookies to combat fraud and rate-limiting (not showing the exact same ads repeatedly)" and "you cannot opt out of showing ads to users based on their previous interactions with the advertiser, such as visits to an advertiser's website, known as remarketing"[1] sure sound like tracking to me. Far less invasive tracking than Google normally does, but clearly still tracking.
Privacy badger is quite specific in what it blocks. It blocks third party tracking cookies that track you across multiple domains.
First party cookies are no problem. Third party cookies that are only used in one domain are no problem. Third party non-tracking cookies are no problem.
So it does block the equivalent of bringing a large knife to a bar.
Privacy badger doesn't have filters like this. That's the whole point. It sees Google doesn't respect the DNT header (it sets tracking cookies) and shuts it down. This is privacy badger working as intended.
Perhaps Google should split off their nonpersonalized ads service into a different domain so such services can easily distinguish between the two?