4 ms·

The problem isn't advertisements per se, the problem is advertisement networks that track users and sell their profiles. The only thing I have installed that co

The problem isn't advertisements per se, the problem is advertisement networks that track users and sell their profiles. The only thing I have installed that counts as an ad blocker is Ghostery. I still get served advertisements at conscientious websites like duckduckgo.com or any other place that doesn't rely 100% on tracking networks. Imagine if simply because you walked into Target, they hired a private investigator to follow you around and determine your personal habits, hobbies and other stores you visited. Imagine if they then used that information to attempt to lure you into the store, or sold that information to Best Buy so they could lure you into the store. I think most people would have a problem with such behavior. Making a more realistic physical analogy would be slipping an RFID token into your wallet without you noticing and only tracking you in stores that use the corresponding RFID reader. In my opinion, tracking networks go the extra mile beyond a creepiness factor. My visit to your website isn't tacit approval for you to peruse my browsing of other websites. I shouldn't need to opt out of this behavior by installing Ghostery in the first place.

geocar 11y ago
Individual profiles are rarely sold directly[1], but some demographic is taken so that the publisher can sell your traffic at a higher rate. This is a good thing because it means they can make more money with less traffic, which in turn means that they don't have to appeal to anybody and everybody. This is (hypothetically) where quality content comes from. Unfortunately most of the ad industry is really crap at this. For example, Oracle/Bluekai leak `var bk_results` into the web page allowing anyone to pick up this data which means that this information can (and is) often used for much more than just better ads. [1]: One notable space where they are sold is ABM. Unless you're a decision maker for an enterprise supply budget, this isn't you.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  It is odd to see advertisers speak of tracking so casually. Tracking is still new. Up until a few years ago (like 3) the majority of the industry (by money) did not track users. A huge, but admittedly declining, segment still don't. Billboards do not track. TV ads do not track. Physical shop fronts do not track. Radio ads do not track. And a great many website still sell space to people selling actual products, rather than banner ads, which bypasses all adblockers. There are plenty of ways to get your message out, and make money in return, without inventing new supercookies for me to ferret out of my system.
  - geocar 11y ago
    Both Outdoors and Television do the same by-demographic buying/selling, in fact, that's where the Internet got it! Outdoors and Television don't track (except when they do[1]) because they don't need to; because there exists a huge problem with digital that doesn't exist for Outdoors and Television: Ad Fraud. There are a lot of websites out there with a lot of (aggregate) traffic, but that individually don't have enough traffic to approach advertisers directly. It is good that we can monetise them because sometimes this can fund their niche content, however it also means that people can make fake websites and trick advertisers into buying that space. Of course, real users don't go to those sites, which is a nascent use for tracking: Sites that are visited by some population who don't visit other sites are simply more suspicious. [1]: Precision Marketing (for example) has data on billboards collected from mobile devices. Many OTT and SmartTV devices send tracking data as well.
    - cpeterso 11y ago
      Have there been studies showing how much, if at all, user tracking improves ad clickthrough or revenue?
      - geocar 11y ago
        Yes to both, but I am suspicious about most of the mathematics used to prove uplift and conversions using micro-models because of simple counter-examples like the blank ad[1] that generated a median clickthrough rate, and because of the prevalence of one-tailed "dropoff" charts don't pass the laugh test. For more on this phenomenon, there's a book[2] that I'm oft to recommend. Nevertheless, I also believe there are genuine means for revenue that utilise user tracking, but this is more work and attention than the typical digital ad campaign receives. [1]: http://adage.com/article/digital/incredible-click-rate/236233/ http://adage.com/article/digital/incredible-click-rate/23623... [2]: http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Lie-Statistics-Penguin-Business/dp/0140136290 http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Lie-Statistics-Penguin-Business/...
  - a3n 11y ago
    > TV ads do not track. Are we sure about that? Smart TVs would seem to make this at least possible, and probably easy.
- aplorbust 11y ago
  Do you ever feel that companies that do online advertising are not the best use of your talents? Is there no choice in life? Nothing better to work on?
  - themartorana 11y ago
    I own a small, independent mobile games company. If you can figure out how to get people to pay for games (without resorting to psychological trickery like Candy Crush) you could make millions. I'd love to run a pure paid model and rip out the bloat and headaches of advertising SDKs, but I also have employees who count on a paycheck and like working on games, and app stores that foster a race to the bottom and highly promote free games over paid. So I'm pretty happy with my place in life right now.
    - sandworm101 11y ago
      Keep chasing that dragon. Mobile games aren't much more than ringtones. Take note of how much time you spend marketing and whale-chasing v how much time is spent on the actual game. KSP, Subnautica, Prison Architect, Minecraft, Don't Starve ... there is plenty of money being made by independent studios once you get off the mobile merry-go-round.
      - themartorana 11y ago
        This is incredibly, offensively tone deaf. Our biggest game is over 5 years old, we spend 95% of our time on it on features and improvements, and we don't have in-app purchases (besides the ability to buy away ads) so we could care less about whale chasing. Millions of people play, our retention is at the top of the market, and we make 95% of our money advertising because less than 2% of players are willing to part with $1.99 to turn off ads (but many play for years). Please don't make assumptions or comments about things you don't actually have experience with.
        sandworm101 11y ago
        Lol, no experience. I've lived through the mobile gaming thing. I've seen clients rise and fall, and cry, because of the ridiculousness that is selling games on phones. It is dragon-chasing. It's all about trying to pry pennies out of people for tiny little games. 1.99? Right there is another silly marketing trope, as if that penny would ever make a difference for a careful consumer.
rhizome 11y ago
The problem isn't advertisements per se, the problem is advertisement networks that track users and sell their profiles. I'm not sure what is gained by changing the subject like this, but I think at the end of the day we can agree that websites are allowing the ad networks they use to have nearly-unfettered access to your browser, and that this is a problem among several.

geocar 11y ago

Individual profiles are rarely sold directly[1], but some demographic is taken so that the publisher can sell your traffic at a higher rate. This is a good thing because it means they can make more money with less traffic, which in turn means that they don't have to appeal to anybody and everybody. This is (hypothetically) where quality content comes from. Unfortunately most of the ad industry is really crap at this. For example, Oracle/Bluekai leak `var bk_results` into the web page allowing anyone to pick up this data which means that this information can (and is) often used for much more than just better ads. [1]: One notable space where they are sold is ABM. Unless you're a decision maker for an enterprise supply budget, this isn't you.

sandworm101 11y ago
It is odd to see advertisers speak of tracking so casually. Tracking is still new. Up until a few years ago (like 3) the majority of the industry (by money) did not track users. A huge, but admittedly declining, segment still don't. Billboards do not track. TV ads do not track. Physical shop fronts do not track. Radio ads do not track. And a great many website still sell space to people selling actual products, rather than banner ads, which bypasses all adblockers. There are plenty of ways to get your message out, and make money in return, without inventing new supercookies for me to ferret out of my system.
- geocar 11y ago
  Both Outdoors and Television do the same by-demographic buying/selling, in fact, that's where the Internet got it! Outdoors and Television don't track (except when they do[1]) because they don't need to; because there exists a huge problem with digital that doesn't exist for Outdoors and Television: Ad Fraud. There are a lot of websites out there with a lot of (aggregate) traffic, but that individually don't have enough traffic to approach advertisers directly. It is good that we can monetise them because sometimes this can fund their niche content, however it also means that people can make fake websites and trick advertisers into buying that space. Of course, real users don't go to those sites, which is a nascent use for tracking: Sites that are visited by some population who don't visit other sites are simply more suspicious. [1]: Precision Marketing (for example) has data on billboards collected from mobile devices. Many OTT and SmartTV devices send tracking data as well.
  - cpeterso 11y ago
    Have there been studies showing how much, if at all, user tracking improves ad clickthrough or revenue?
    - geocar 11y ago
      Yes to both, but I am suspicious about most of the mathematics used to prove uplift and conversions using micro-models because of simple counter-examples like the blank ad[1] that generated a median clickthrough rate, and because of the prevalence of one-tailed "dropoff" charts don't pass the laugh test. For more on this phenomenon, there's a book[2] that I'm oft to recommend. Nevertheless, I also believe there are genuine means for revenue that utilise user tracking, but this is more work and attention than the typical digital ad campaign receives. [1]: http://adage.com/article/digital/incredible-click-rate/236233/ http://adage.com/article/digital/incredible-click-rate/23623... [2]: http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Lie-Statistics-Penguin-Business/dp/0140136290 http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Lie-Statistics-Penguin-Business/...
- a3n 11y ago
  > TV ads do not track. Are we sure about that? Smart TVs would seem to make this at least possible, and probably easy.
aplorbust 11y ago
Do you ever feel that companies that do online advertising are not the best use of your talents? Is there no choice in life? Nothing better to work on?
- themartorana 11y ago
  I own a small, independent mobile games company. If you can figure out how to get people to pay for games (without resorting to psychological trickery like Candy Crush) you could make millions. I'd love to run a pure paid model and rip out the bloat and headaches of advertising SDKs, but I also have employees who count on a paycheck and like working on games, and app stores that foster a race to the bottom and highly promote free games over paid. So I'm pretty happy with my place in life right now.
  - sandworm101 11y ago
    Keep chasing that dragon. Mobile games aren't much more than ringtones. Take note of how much time you spend marketing and whale-chasing v how much time is spent on the actual game. KSP, Subnautica, Prison Architect, Minecraft, Don't Starve ... there is plenty of money being made by independent studios once you get off the mobile merry-go-round.
    - themartorana 11y ago
      This is incredibly, offensively tone deaf. Our biggest game is over 5 years old, we spend 95% of our time on it on features and improvements, and we don't have in-app purchases (besides the ability to buy away ads) so we could care less about whale chasing. Millions of people play, our retention is at the top of the market, and we make 95% of our money advertising because less than 2% of players are willing to part with $1.99 to turn off ads (but many play for years). Please don't make assumptions or comments about things you don't actually have experience with.
      - sandworm101 11y ago
        Lol, no experience. I've lived through the mobile gaming thing. I've seen clients rise and fall, and cry, because of the ridiculousness that is selling games on phones. It is dragon-chasing. It's all about trying to pry pennies out of people for tiny little games. 1.99? Right there is another silly marketing trope, as if that penny would ever make a difference for a careful consumer.

rhizome 11y ago

The problem isn't advertisements per se, the problem is advertisement networks that track users and sell their profiles. I'm not sure what is gained by changing the subject like this, but I think at the end of the day we can agree that websites are allowing the ad networks they use to have nearly-unfettered access to your browser, and that this is a problem among several.