3 ms·

I'm not trying to defend Google by any means, but I've always wondered how DDG can be as profitable as Google if they take into account less information when sh

I'm not trying to defend Google by any means, but I've always wondered how DDG can be as profitable as Google if they take into account less information when showing you ads. Surely using more information allows you to more efficiently match supply with potential demand, which is the point of ads. Is there any research out there that shows that this efficiency gap does not exist? I don't use or follow Facebook that much, but every time I hear Mark Zuckerberg defending Facebook's business model, he always says something like "we want to make sure the ads you see are actually useful/relevant to you". Is there a way to achieve this outcome without taking into account more personal information?

Ixio 8y ago
The way I see it everyone should have some sort of personal data broker (maybe as a browser extension ?). Your data broker has all of your personal information and keeps it safe for you. If you make a query on a search engine I'm sure we can find a way to have better results without the search engine retaining your private information. Either there is some kind of third party you can temporarily give your info to and trust it to forget it immediatly after giving you the results. Or the search engine could give standard results and your data broker then filters it using your info (which doesn't leave your pc). I used to think of this data broker as some sort of AI but now that I think about it maybe a simple browser extension that filters Google search results or augments your DDG queries might do the trick.
probably_wrong 8y ago
> I've always wondered how DDG can be as profitable as Google if they take into account less information when showing you ads AFAIK, no one has conclusively shown that highly targeted ads perform better than interest-based ones (as in, putting ads for cars in car magazines). In fact, I'm under the impression that "we don't really know what we are doing" is the ad industry's secret. The Atlantic calls this Wanamaker's Paradox[1], in honor of a retailer that said "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, the trouble is I don't know which half". If DDG is right and showing ads based on your search terms is enough, then you'd expect them to get ahead of Google, because they would have similar profits with less overhead. Of course, there is much more to Google's dominance than "because they show better ads", so I don't think "efficiency gap" is the best way to look at it anyway. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/a-dangerous-question-does-internet-advertising-work-at-all/372704/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/a-dange...
detaro 8y ago
Does Google take more information into account when showing you ads on the search results page? I thought those were a fairly straight-forward search term based matching/auction too, unlike the ads Google sells on other sites?
johnmarcus 8y ago
Bing pays well for anything that drives it traffic, just to stay relavent.

Ixio 8y ago

The way I see it everyone should have some sort of personal data broker (maybe as a browser extension ?). Your data broker has all of your personal information and keeps it safe for you. If you make a query on a search engine I'm sure we can find a way to have better results without the search engine retaining your private information. Either there is some kind of third party you can temporarily give your info to and trust it to forget it immediatly after giving you the results. Or the search engine could give standard results and your data broker then filters it using your info (which doesn't leave your pc). I used to think of this data broker as some sort of AI but now that I think about it maybe a simple browser extension that filters Google search results or augments your DDG queries might do the trick.

probably_wrong 8y ago

> I've always wondered how DDG can be as profitable as Google if they take into account less information when showing you ads AFAIK, no one has conclusively shown that highly targeted ads perform better than interest-based ones (as in, putting ads for cars in car magazines). In fact, I'm under the impression that "we don't really know what we are doing" is the ad industry's secret. The Atlantic calls this Wanamaker's Paradox[1], in honor of a retailer that said "Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted, the trouble is I don't know which half". If DDG is right and showing ads based on your search terms is enough, then you'd expect them to get ahead of Google, because they would have similar profits with less overhead. Of course, there is much more to Google's dominance than "because they show better ads", so I don't think "efficiency gap" is the best way to look at it anyway. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/a-dangerous-question-does-internet-advertising-work-at-all/372704/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/a-dange...

detaro 8y ago

Does Google take more information into account when showing you ads on the search results page? I thought those were a fairly straight-forward search term based matching/auction too, unlike the ads Google sells on other sites?

johnmarcus 8y ago

Bing pays well for anything that drives it traffic, just to stay relavent.