5 ms·

Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

101 points by tolt 9y ago

digi_owl 9y ago
I hate to say it, but Oslo Freedom Forum has a checkered history.
- ghughes 9y ago
  You hate to say it, yet you were able to ignore the substance of the article and say it anyway.
- binarymax 9y ago
  Please don't fall into the trap of this fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well
theprop 9y ago
Nice thoughts on privacy. Vivaldi is good, but the Epic Privacy Browser is better and it also blocks a lot of Facebook & Google tracking.
yuhong 9y ago
Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."
- mankyd 9y ago
  And yet... To make up an example, when I walk into a movie theater, I prefer to see ads for movies that I might actually go see. If I have kids, I might be interested in the latest G-rated film. If I don't, that probably won't tempt me. Location alone doesn't tell you that info. I kind of like getting at least some specificity and personalization with my ads.
  - datatan 9y ago
    If I walk into a theatre I don't want to see ads because I'm paying to be there.
  - floor__ 9y ago
    I think most people research movies before going to see them, I rarely purchase something without researching it. IMO the less invasive the better, if I have to see an ad id prefer it to be general. IMO the benefits of personalized ads are far less than the cost of having them. Given your example the ad supplier would know if you have kids or not.. In getting this info what else do they know about you? Are your kids adopted? Are you married? Sexual orientation etc.. The cost is great to have personalized ads.
  - falcolas 9y ago
    Sure it does. You're in theater X, at a time that movie Y is playing. Based on those two bits of data, that's enough to market to you based on movie Y. There's no need to know your age, ethnicity, gender, or anything else to be able to market to you while you're at movie Y. Even more accurately, there's not even a reason to know your location, if they simply market according to the movie you're already paying to watch.
  - ginko 9y ago
    When I walk into a movie theater, I already know what movie I'm going to see. Ideally I don't want to have to see 15-30 minutes of trailers before the actual film starts either.
    - paulddraper 9y ago
      I don't mind seeing 1 plus 6 hundreds movie for the price of 1.
- mirimir 9y ago
  I don't want those either. But hey, I handle my own bans on tracking. I don't care that everything that this persona does online is tracked and associated. But then, I have other personas.
- bobajeff 9y ago
  Look. I don't want to be tracked, cataloged and tailored to without my permission. I don't care how accurate they are (in my experience not very much) it's invasive and creepy.
TimJYoung 9y ago
I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.
- datatan 9y ago
  Because by targeting the ads they can make eleventy billion dollars instead of just 10 billion. It's about value. Ads were cheap back then because you couldn't be sure the people seeing them cared. Now that you can be reasonably sure you can charge more for the experience.
- zebrafish 9y ago
  I wonder if there is any data around effectiveness of targeted advertising. How many lipsticks were sold before social-data-backed target advertising? How many lipsticks have been sold now that we know which shades and "influencers" a particular person prefers? I guess I could go search for it. You would have to imagine there would be an uptick. However, in my own mind, the targeted ads don't influence me to spend as much money as the broad-based brand awareness type. There's a term for that style of advertising which I can't remember right now but it basically entails plastering "Tide" over everything so that the next time you think of detergent, you think of Tide.
- bobajeff 9y ago
  Because it's an invasion of privacy. If you have a personal conversation to a friend about a party you had when you were five you don't expect to hear details referenced by a busker the next day at a park you frequent. Edit: I was arguing with no one.
  - stan_rogers 9y ago
    Just to clarify: "enamored of" is basically the same phrase as "in love with". You're agreeing with the parent post.
  - 9y ago
nercht12 9y ago
Where do you draw the line for the "ban" though? ISPs, Google, and many of these companies collect PI for payments and associate these payments with invoices/receipts/etc. so in effect, they already have some of this info. We could ask for no analytics code on sites, but then we speculate on what code belongs to the "analytics" and what is there merely for "services". The latter would blanket everything. Besides - who's going to do the inspecting? Some inspector with his pockets full of lobbyist money? Some disinterested bureaucrat? A ban is pointless. What is really needed is for businesses to find a more effective advertising means that doesn't entail collecting so much PI.
- eveningcoffee 9y ago
  Most important thing is to make it impossible to create feedback loops. Nobody should not be able to know how successful the ad campaign was for every single person.

101 points by tolt 9y ago

digi_owl 9y ago

I hate to say it, but Oslo Freedom Forum has a checkered history.

ghughes 9y ago
You hate to say it, yet you were able to ignore the substance of the article and say it anyway.
binarymax 9y ago
Please don't fall into the trap of this fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

theprop 9y ago

Nice thoughts on privacy. Vivaldi is good, but the Epic Privacy Browser is better and it also blocks a lot of Facebook & Google tracking.

yuhong 9y ago

Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."

mankyd 9y ago
And yet... To make up an example, when I walk into a movie theater, I prefer to see ads for movies that I might actually go see. If I have kids, I might be interested in the latest G-rated film. If I don't, that probably won't tempt me. Location alone doesn't tell you that info. I kind of like getting at least some specificity and personalization with my ads.
- datatan 9y ago
  If I walk into a theatre I don't want to see ads because I'm paying to be there.
- floor__ 9y ago
  I think most people research movies before going to see them, I rarely purchase something without researching it. IMO the less invasive the better, if I have to see an ad id prefer it to be general. IMO the benefits of personalized ads are far less than the cost of having them. Given your example the ad supplier would know if you have kids or not.. In getting this info what else do they know about you? Are your kids adopted? Are you married? Sexual orientation etc.. The cost is great to have personalized ads.
- falcolas 9y ago
  Sure it does. You're in theater X, at a time that movie Y is playing. Based on those two bits of data, that's enough to market to you based on movie Y. There's no need to know your age, ethnicity, gender, or anything else to be able to market to you while you're at movie Y. Even more accurately, there's not even a reason to know your location, if they simply market according to the movie you're already paying to watch.
- ginko 9y ago
  When I walk into a movie theater, I already know what movie I'm going to see. Ideally I don't want to have to see 15-30 minutes of trailers before the actual film starts either.
  - paulddraper 9y ago
    I don't mind seeing 1 plus 6 hundreds movie for the price of 1.
mirimir 9y ago
I don't want those either. But hey, I handle my own bans on tracking. I don't care that everything that this persona does online is tracked and associated. But then, I have other personas.
bobajeff 9y ago
Look. I don't want to be tracked, cataloged and tailored to without my permission. I don't care how accurate they are (in my experience not very much) it's invasive and creepy.

TimJYoung 9y ago

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

datatan 9y ago
Because by targeting the ads they can make eleventy billion dollars instead of just 10 billion. It's about value. Ads were cheap back then because you couldn't be sure the people seeing them cared. Now that you can be reasonably sure you can charge more for the experience.
zebrafish 9y ago
I wonder if there is any data around effectiveness of targeted advertising. How many lipsticks were sold before social-data-backed target advertising? How many lipsticks have been sold now that we know which shades and "influencers" a particular person prefers? I guess I could go search for it. You would have to imagine there would be an uptick. However, in my own mind, the targeted ads don't influence me to spend as much money as the broad-based brand awareness type. There's a term for that style of advertising which I can't remember right now but it basically entails plastering "Tide" over everything so that the next time you think of detergent, you think of Tide.
bobajeff 9y ago
Because it's an invasion of privacy. If you have a personal conversation to a friend about a party you had when you were five you don't expect to hear details referenced by a busker the next day at a park you frequent. Edit: I was arguing with no one.
- stan_rogers 9y ago
  Just to clarify: "enamored of" is basically the same phrase as "in love with". You're agreeing with the parent post.
- 9y ago

nercht12 9y ago

Where do you draw the line for the "ban" though? ISPs, Google, and many of these companies collect PI for payments and associate these payments with invoices/receipts/etc. so in effect, they already have some of this info. We could ask for no analytics code on sites, but then we speculate on what code belongs to the "analytics" and what is there merely for "services". The latter would blanket everything. Besides - who's going to do the inspecting? Some inspector with his pockets full of lobbyist money? Some disinterested bureaucrat? A ban is pointless. What is really needed is for businesses to find a more effective advertising means that doesn't entail collecting so much PI.

eveningcoffee 9y ago
Most important thing is to make it impossible to create feedback loops. Nobody should not be able to know how successful the ad campaign was for every single person.