5 ms·

I find it interesting that a lot of content producers have feel entitled to users' participation in analytics at all. Sure, it may be frustrating when a user b

by davb 11y ago

I find it interesting that a lot of content producers have feel entitled to users' participation in analytics at all. Sure, it may be frustrating when a user blocks tracking tools (especially self hosted ones) but that's the their choice. We got by for decades without analysing user habits (even in a local only context, without correlation with third party data). There are so few examples of cases where analysing user behaviour was a make or break factor in a store's survival. Sure, it can be useful to know what a user looked at and, as you suggest, how difficult it is to find the eggs. But there are better ways. Physical stores at one point (and still now, in many cases) respect that user choice. Want to participate? Get a loyalty card. We'll watch how you spend, but we'll give a little something back to participants. On the web, the solution is simple. Do it on your application servers back end. Have your request handler (which should probably know a lot more about your user in the context of your application than any third party tool) log user requests and actions. You'll be able to tie data gathered to a logged in user and their local purchase or browsing history. You'll get to know your user better and you'll avoid third party tools that creep out a growing proportion of your users. You're not entitled to participation in analytics.

dhimes 11y ago
We got by for decades without analysing user habits Depends when you start counting the decades. Since Netscape and the 'coming out' of the www, we've always paid attention to where people go on our own web pages.
- leereeves 11y ago
  And stores have always paid attention to how many items they sell. But (continuing the metaphor) now they're tracking what each customer buys and when, where they came from and where they go, where their eyes wander and how long they look at an item... Then sharing that data with other stores to profile customers, and find out who's sick, pregnant, graduating, on a diet, what political candidates they support... Tracking today is nothing like tracking site visitors in the '90s.
  - dhimes 11y ago
    Completely agree. It's the sharing that bothers me.
- kelseydh 11y ago
  Back in the 90's when everybody installed those wacky click counters on their page, it all seemed so innocent...
- mml 11y ago
  1896 is when "loyalty programs" (wherein the store collects loads of info about your purchases & habits) started.
sdoering 11y ago
In the "good ol' days" (TM the shop-owners in a community knew quite a lot about their customers. Oh Mary just gave birth, Henry is currently sick, Walter likes his coffee a little stronger, James a little weaker (something with his stomach). Danielle drinks only tee, has two kids and the marriage is not really happy. And so on. A lot bordered on gossip, a lot was very valid and relevant information. People talked. So it was totally normal in a smallish community for the store owners to have an extensive profile on every customer. All in their head for sure, but non the less. And guess what - everybody benefitted. The clerk could recommend based on what he knew. People would be directed to relevant produce. By the way this works even today. If I buy at my normal place I get personalized recommendations for cheese from the lady behind the counter. We talk, she knows a little bit about my tastes and I get to try new things.
- Majestic121 11y ago
  That's great, if you want personal recommendations. But I do not. I want a choice, the choice to share my data and have personal recommendations, or not share anything and have generic ads. But no one give me that choice, so I have to take it by "hiring the bouncers"
  - Melk 11y ago
    This is the direction we should and, I predict, we will be headed. Personal recommendations and analytics should be optional and opt-in. The EU cookie law is a step in the right direction but the reason it's so clumsy is because cookies for now are opt-out. The way to get there is to separate the browsing/shopping process from the tracking/recommendations. Instead of bouncers we should have personal shoppers. The majority of people I speak to have no problem with trackers so there is no reason not to make it more transparent where users can choose which data they want to share and for what purpose.
    - monochromatic 11y ago
      I've never seen a single site with the EU cookie warning saying "click here if you're ok with cookies, or click over there if you'd rather we didn't use them." It's always "click here to proceed with cookies, or fuck off."
ssharp 11y ago
To be fair, you're not entitled to free content free of tracking either.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- mrweasel 11y ago
  True, but we aren't really given much choice either. Even if I buy for a service or buy a product from a company, I'm not going to be excluded from tracking. Amazon isn't going to not data-mine the shit out of my purchases, even though I paid for a product. I do question the value of all that data collection though. Sure it's interesting, but I don't really believe that data collection and analysis at the current scale translate directly to more sales. Honestly what's the value of tracking me around the net, how is knowing what sites I visit going to translate to a sale of some product?
  - ssharp 11y ago
    Walmart wouldn't run an ad in GQ highlighting it's clothing section: because the ad isn't going to resonate with the person seeing it. However, unlike Walmart who would get on the phone with an account executive with Conde Nast (GQ's publisher) and talk through the campaign, most website advertisers and publishers do not have people dedicated to doing 1-1 sales. Publishers want the most money possible per ad unit and advertisers want the most sales possible within a reasonable acquisition cost. To balance those two things out and create value on both sides, ad exchanges and the demand platforms that tie into ad exchanges provide tons of targeting and remarketing opportunities. That allows advertisers to target their most profitable audiences. However, in order to offer all the rich and detailed targeting options, the exchanges and platforms have to know what individuals are doing so they can create personas and profiles of you. If this happened magically in the magazine industry and magazine ads could be customized to the individual reader, then Walmart might buy some space in GQ if they learned a small portion of GQ readers are actually bargain hunters and shop at Walmart all the time for clothes and only read GQ more for their interviews and cocktail recipes rather than for men's fashion info.
  - 11y ago
empressplay 11y ago
Sysops of BBSes used to watch their users while they were online. When the BBS only had one line this was easy (and often you couldn't do anything else BUT watch them.) So, to say that analysing user behaviour is new is probably an overstatement, at least in the BBS example.
akavel 11y ago
You write "Do it on your application servers back end", but then the parent comment actually argues specifically for "self-hosted Piwik and other such internal analytics tools". So, I'm now confused: do you actually agree with it? or disagree? or what? was there something edited in the parent comment in the meantime? did I miss something?
- davb 11y ago
  There's a difference between using tools like Piwik (which still burden the browser with additional HTTP requests), and logging the relevant data in the application or server code itself (Apache/nginx logs, or writing your own context aware logging code in your Django/Rails/whatever framework application). What I'm suggesting is that applications can completely unobtrusively log visitor data internally, without requiring the client to make additional requests. In the same way that ad networks could serve data through your own application backend (rather than being requested by the client), if the ad networks and advertisers could stomach losing access to cross site user data tracking. The GP was complaining that users still block Piwik and other self-hosted solutions. Of course they do. I'll block every single request I can, if it's not just fetching the content that I want. Some developers and content providers complain that by blocking analytics services (including internally hosted ones) means they'll be left completely in the dark. This is wrong. They can always log visits through their web app code on the server side - they'll have the benefit of complete request context access ("Is the user logged in?", "Is their account in credit?", "Did they buy this item at some point in the past?") but simply won't be able to correlate this data with other websites logs (a benefit to the users, from a privacy perspective). As a user, there is absolutely no benefit to me whatsoever of your site knowing my age, income bracket, recent (off-site!) browsing history and interests. None. Ad networks, advertisers and content providers will benefit. I won't.
  - joshmanders 11y ago
    > I'll block every single request I can, if it's not just fetching the content that I want. Do you block images, css, and other stuff that doesn't pertain to the content at hand? > What I'm suggesting is that applications can completely unobtrusively log visitor data internally, without requiring the client to make additional requests. In the same way that ad networks could serve data through your own application backend (rather than being requested by the client), if the ad networks and advertisers could stomach losing access to cross site user data tracking. Yeah if all you want is referrer, user agent, url requested, and ip. But what about other great information in help with making your site BETTER for your users, like screen size? > As a user, there is absolutely no benefit to me whatsoever of your site knowing my age, income bracket, recent (off-site!) browsing history and interests. None. Ad networks, advertisers and content providers will benefit. I won't. I find it strange given the demographics of HN that people still believe by me putting Pwiki on my site to gather analytics about my visitors, that somehow taps into your bank account to see your income, requests your tax documents, downloads your birth certificate and gives me a full list of your last 100 visited urls. That data is only available if I somehow put a tracking pixel on as many sites as I can. Such as a 3rd party script. So because of that I can see blocking Google Analytics, or 3rd party trackers, but what are you doing by blocking 1st party stuff like Pwiki other than giving a big fuck you to the website owner?

by davb 11y ago

dhimes 11y ago

We got by for decades without analysing user habits Depends when you start counting the decades. Since Netscape and the 'coming out' of the www, we've always paid attention to where people go on our own web pages.

leereeves 11y ago
And stores have always paid attention to how many items they sell. But (continuing the metaphor) now they're tracking what each customer buys and when, where they came from and where they go, where their eyes wander and how long they look at an item... Then sharing that data with other stores to profile customers, and find out who's sick, pregnant, graduating, on a diet, what political candidates they support... Tracking today is nothing like tracking site visitors in the '90s.
- dhimes 11y ago
  Completely agree. It's the sharing that bothers me.
kelseydh 11y ago
Back in the 90's when everybody installed those wacky click counters on their page, it all seemed so innocent...
mml 11y ago
1896 is when "loyalty programs" (wherein the store collects loads of info about your purchases & habits) started.

sdoering 11y ago

In the "good ol' days" (TM the shop-owners in a community knew quite a lot about their customers. Oh Mary just gave birth, Henry is currently sick, Walter likes his coffee a little stronger, James a little weaker (something with his stomach). Danielle drinks only tee, has two kids and the marriage is not really happy. And so on. A lot bordered on gossip, a lot was very valid and relevant information. People talked. So it was totally normal in a smallish community for the store owners to have an extensive profile on every customer. All in their head for sure, but non the less. And guess what - everybody benefitted. The clerk could recommend based on what he knew. People would be directed to relevant produce. By the way this works even today. If I buy at my normal place I get personalized recommendations for cheese from the lady behind the counter. We talk, she knows a little bit about my tastes and I get to try new things.

Majestic121 11y ago
That's great, if you want personal recommendations. But I do not. I want a choice, the choice to share my data and have personal recommendations, or not share anything and have generic ads. But no one give me that choice, so I have to take it by "hiring the bouncers"
- Melk 11y ago
  This is the direction we should and, I predict, we will be headed. Personal recommendations and analytics should be optional and opt-in. The EU cookie law is a step in the right direction but the reason it's so clumsy is because cookies for now are opt-out. The way to get there is to separate the browsing/shopping process from the tracking/recommendations. Instead of bouncers we should have personal shoppers. The majority of people I speak to have no problem with trackers so there is no reason not to make it more transparent where users can choose which data they want to share and for what purpose.
  - monochromatic 11y ago
    I've never seen a single site with the EU cookie warning saying "click here if you're ok with cookies, or click over there if you'd rather we didn't use them." It's always "click here to proceed with cookies, or fuck off."

ssharp 11y ago

To be fair, you're not entitled to free content free of tracking either.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mrweasel 11y ago
True, but we aren't really given much choice either. Even if I buy for a service or buy a product from a company, I'm not going to be excluded from tracking. Amazon isn't going to not data-mine the shit out of my purchases, even though I paid for a product. I do question the value of all that data collection though. Sure it's interesting, but I don't really believe that data collection and analysis at the current scale translate directly to more sales. Honestly what's the value of tracking me around the net, how is knowing what sites I visit going to translate to a sale of some product?
- ssharp 11y ago
  Walmart wouldn't run an ad in GQ highlighting it's clothing section: because the ad isn't going to resonate with the person seeing it. However, unlike Walmart who would get on the phone with an account executive with Conde Nast (GQ's publisher) and talk through the campaign, most website advertisers and publishers do not have people dedicated to doing 1-1 sales. Publishers want the most money possible per ad unit and advertisers want the most sales possible within a reasonable acquisition cost. To balance those two things out and create value on both sides, ad exchanges and the demand platforms that tie into ad exchanges provide tons of targeting and remarketing opportunities. That allows advertisers to target their most profitable audiences. However, in order to offer all the rich and detailed targeting options, the exchanges and platforms have to know what individuals are doing so they can create personas and profiles of you. If this happened magically in the magazine industry and magazine ads could be customized to the individual reader, then Walmart might buy some space in GQ if they learned a small portion of GQ readers are actually bargain hunters and shop at Walmart all the time for clothes and only read GQ more for their interviews and cocktail recipes rather than for men's fashion info.
- 11y ago

empressplay 11y ago

Sysops of BBSes used to watch their users while they were online. When the BBS only had one line this was easy (and often you couldn't do anything else BUT watch them.) So, to say that analysing user behaviour is new is probably an overstatement, at least in the BBS example.

akavel 11y ago

You write "Do it on your application servers back end", but then the parent comment actually argues specifically for "self-hosted Piwik and other such internal analytics tools". So, I'm now confused: do you actually agree with it? or disagree? or what? was there something edited in the parent comment in the meantime? did I miss something?

davb 11y ago
There's a difference between using tools like Piwik (which still burden the browser with additional HTTP requests), and logging the relevant data in the application or server code itself (Apache/nginx logs, or writing your own context aware logging code in your Django/Rails/whatever framework application). What I'm suggesting is that applications can completely unobtrusively log visitor data internally, without requiring the client to make additional requests. In the same way that ad networks could serve data through your own application backend (rather than being requested by the client), if the ad networks and advertisers could stomach losing access to cross site user data tracking. The GP was complaining that users still block Piwik and other self-hosted solutions. Of course they do. I'll block every single request I can, if it's not just fetching the content that I want. Some developers and content providers complain that by blocking analytics services (including internally hosted ones) means they'll be left completely in the dark. This is wrong. They can always log visits through their web app code on the server side - they'll have the benefit of complete request context access ("Is the user logged in?", "Is their account in credit?", "Did they buy this item at some point in the past?") but simply won't be able to correlate this data with other websites logs (a benefit to the users, from a privacy perspective). As a user, there is absolutely no benefit to me whatsoever of your site knowing my age, income bracket, recent (off-site!) browsing history and interests. None. Ad networks, advertisers and content providers will benefit. I won't.
- joshmanders 11y ago
  > I'll block every single request I can, if it's not just fetching the content that I want. Do you block images, css, and other stuff that doesn't pertain to the content at hand? > What I'm suggesting is that applications can completely unobtrusively log visitor data internally, without requiring the client to make additional requests. In the same way that ad networks could serve data through your own application backend (rather than being requested by the client), if the ad networks and advertisers could stomach losing access to cross site user data tracking. Yeah if all you want is referrer, user agent, url requested, and ip. But what about other great information in help with making your site BETTER for your users, like screen size? > As a user, there is absolutely no benefit to me whatsoever of your site knowing my age, income bracket, recent (off-site!) browsing history and interests. None. Ad networks, advertisers and content providers will benefit. I won't. I find it strange given the demographics of HN that people still believe by me putting Pwiki on my site to gather analytics about my visitors, that somehow taps into your bank account to see your income, requests your tax documents, downloads your birth certificate and gives me a full list of your last 100 visited urls. That data is only available if I somehow put a tracking pixel on as many sites as I can. Such as a 3rd party script. So because of that I can see blocking Google Analytics, or 3rd party trackers, but what are you doing by blocking 1st party stuff like Pwiki other than giving a big fuck you to the website owner?