3 ms·

Behavioral targeting which requires stalking people 24/7 and building invasive profiles is not only unethical but creepy, deeply dehumanizing and democratically

by throw2016 8y ago

Behavioral targeting which requires stalking people 24/7 and building invasive profiles is not only unethical but creepy, deeply dehumanizing and democratically problematic. As usual many are too blinded by greed to realize this simple fact, focused on 'innovation' and profit but once you dehumanize your fellow citizens its the beginning of the end. The tone of discussion on HN itself on these issues betrays the dehumanization and alienation from the general concerns of privacy, democracy and ethics.

lapnitnelav 8y ago
Would being able to create various anonymous profiles with interests that are only loosely tied to you be considered less creepy? I'm an industry insider and while yes, it's how I make money, I can't deny there are some creepy bits which should be a concern for all. But unless someone comes up with a better revenue model, most of Internet is supported by the Ad money. Be it the big players such as Google or Facebook, or the many modest operations out there. So we have to figure out a way to make it work, something that shouldn't be creepy but can still support the ecosystem.
- pnw_hazor 8y ago
  Select ads based on the content/copy, not the individual user. No need to track me across the internet and planet.
  - lapnitnelav 8y ago
    Ideally yeah, that would be the best but the supply and demand might not always match up. Maybe no advertiser is willing to spend some money on the content you're being served because it's very irrelevant to them or because there's simply no advertiser with enough budget to pick up the slack. So you end up with highly valuable spots and then the rest which is at best barely enough to cover the costs of the publisher. I'm not trying to blindly advocate for user targeted ads as the be all end all of online ads but the reality is that a huge swath of the publishers would probably disappear, consolidating the web even more.
- throw2016 8y ago
  Its unnecessary but those in the midst of this massive data collection effort have convinced themselves its hypercritical. Context and IP is available with zero tracking and from an advertising perspective, anything more is often superfluous. Someone reading an auto site or watching a video, healthcare information, makeup guides or a million other things already provides nearly 99% of an advertisers profiling needs, and geolocation delivers finely grained control of delivery. No tracking and behavioral creepiness needed. All the tracking betrays a certain unhealthy obsessiveness, a desire for control and second guessing and a false belief that knowing an individuals history, race, religion, sex, health data, political beliefs, purchasing history 'somehow' makes things more efficient. But this looks like pursuing an advertising chimera given it has never and will never be a 'neat' science and human behavior is complex. Why not just take the context and immediate interest, and show some basic respect for your fellow humans.
- KozmoNau7 8y ago
  >"But unless someone comes up with a better revenue model, most of Internet is supported by the Ad money." To be perfectly blunt, that's not my problem. Abolish ad money, let the sites that only exist because of ads die, let the enthusiast-driven sites survive. I feel absolutely no obligation to support ad-funded businesses or individuals. Create a subscription system or use Patreon (with perks for higher tiers), if you need to cover costs. The internet did fine before corporate interests invaded. It'll do fine once we kick them to the curb again.

lapnitnelav 8y ago

Would being able to create various anonymous profiles with interests that are only loosely tied to you be considered less creepy? I'm an industry insider and while yes, it's how I make money, I can't deny there are some creepy bits which should be a concern for all. But unless someone comes up with a better revenue model, most of Internet is supported by the Ad money. Be it the big players such as Google or Facebook, or the many modest operations out there. So we have to figure out a way to make it work, something that shouldn't be creepy but can still support the ecosystem.

pnw_hazor 8y ago
Select ads based on the content/copy, not the individual user. No need to track me across the internet and planet.
- lapnitnelav 8y ago
  Ideally yeah, that would be the best but the supply and demand might not always match up. Maybe no advertiser is willing to spend some money on the content you're being served because it's very irrelevant to them or because there's simply no advertiser with enough budget to pick up the slack. So you end up with highly valuable spots and then the rest which is at best barely enough to cover the costs of the publisher. I'm not trying to blindly advocate for user targeted ads as the be all end all of online ads but the reality is that a huge swath of the publishers would probably disappear, consolidating the web even more.
throw2016 8y ago
Its unnecessary but those in the midst of this massive data collection effort have convinced themselves its hypercritical. Context and IP is available with zero tracking and from an advertising perspective, anything more is often superfluous. Someone reading an auto site or watching a video, healthcare information, makeup guides or a million other things already provides nearly 99% of an advertisers profiling needs, and geolocation delivers finely grained control of delivery. No tracking and behavioral creepiness needed. All the tracking betrays a certain unhealthy obsessiveness, a desire for control and second guessing and a false belief that knowing an individuals history, race, religion, sex, health data, political beliefs, purchasing history 'somehow' makes things more efficient. But this looks like pursuing an advertising chimera given it has never and will never be a 'neat' science and human behavior is complex. Why not just take the context and immediate interest, and show some basic respect for your fellow humans.
KozmoNau7 8y ago
>"But unless someone comes up with a better revenue model, most of Internet is supported by the Ad money." To be perfectly blunt, that's not my problem. Abolish ad money, let the sites that only exist because of ads die, let the enthusiast-driven sites survive. I feel absolutely no obligation to support ad-funded businesses or individuals. Create a subscription system or use Patreon (with perks for higher tiers), if you need to cover costs. The internet did fine before corporate interests invaded. It'll do fine once we kick them to the curb again.