5 ms·

I'm in analytics, not ad tech, though they are pretty well coupled. This is a pretty concerning move. One week is super aggressive. There are several ways arou

I'm in analytics, not ad tech, though they are pretty well coupled. This is a pretty concerning move. One week is super aggressive. There are several ways around their restrictions, but I really wish I didn't have to consider them. Long story short, if you reflect a client-side cookie back from the server-side (by having the host site set up a CNAME to your collection servers), then it sets an HttpOnly cookie that will last as long as you tell it. This technique is pretty effective at also skirting adblockers, which is why I really wish it weren't the easiest solution, as my company has been very conscious of not trying to work around ad blockers and the intent of web site visitors. This is going to surprise and confuse a lot of customers in the analytics world, but ultimately, they'll adapt and we'll make do.

manigandham 8y ago
It will ultimately also accomplish nothing except hurting publishers and giving people less relevant ads.
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  People want less relevant ads, that’s the point.
  - manigandham 8y ago
    They want less ads, not irrelevant ones. Relevancy is the #2 complaint by consumers about ads.
    - stephenr 8y ago
      If ads were relevant to the topic of the site, and had no creepy follow-you-around-the-web behaviour they’d be a lot less offensive.
      - manigandham 8y ago
        We agree. The problem isn't advertising, it's the implementation of online ads.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Well, they are lucky that Apple doesn’t promote its content blocking framework built into iOS. But cry me a river over publishers being hurt by less effective ads or supporting their business based on ads. Ads are bad enough on desktop with plenty of real estate. They make sites unusable on mobile. I’m going to try out Apple News+ soon. If it is any good, I’ll pay for it
  - manigandham 8y ago
    You've posted the same thing dozens of times and I've replied to them before. Advertising as a concept is different from online ads as an execution. The latter is bad but there is no replacement for advertising based business models. Good for you if you pay for the news but you don't represent the billions of people on the internet and what they want, what they can afford, and how they value it is well known. Advertising isn't going anywhere.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      Shouldn’t you disclaim your own biases that you are “currently working on a B2B marketing company”? I have no business interest in not wanting ads.
      - manigandham 8y ago
        I've got nothing to hide. This is my real name. Yes I'm in marketing, I'm known in the industry, I wrote about ad blocking [1], built an adblocker, spent 6 figures to test alternative payments [2], am part of every initiative to make ads better [3], and have spoken with senators to push for regulation. Does that work as a disclaimer? But what does business interest have to do with discussing advertising as a concept vs implementation? We can discuss highly technical topics with nuance but when it comes to ads, why is there such a visceral and emotional reaction? 1. https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/16/ad-blocking-a-primer/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/16/ad-blocking-a-primer/ 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19038820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19038820 3. https://instinctive.io/blog/instinctive-is-a-founding-member-of-acceptable-ads-committee https://instinctive.io/blog/instinctive-is-a-founding-member...
- anoncake 8y ago
  Irrelevant ads are better for customers because they dont work as well.
  - manigandham 8y ago
    That makes no sense. Marketing is about efficiently matching customers with products filling their needs and wants. Advertising is the communication that makes this system work and relevancy is a core factor. Irrelevant ads only waste time and money and work against both sides.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      I’ve got a novel idea. Publishers can make content that people are willing to pay for and charge money.
      - codezero 8y ago
        They’ve tried. It isn’t as simple as that. If it were it’d happen.
        scarface74 8y ago
        It works for newspapers that people care about -- the WSJ, NYT, and I'm sure there are others. Ads aren't working too well either with the increasing use of ad blockers -- even on mobile and Google and FB sucking all of the ad revenue up.
      - manigandham 8y ago
        It's not novel, it's been used for centuries. The industry is a lot smarter than you think. But people don't value news and can't pay anywhere near enough compared to what they consume. Ads allow people to read what they want, when they want, for how much they want, regardless of publisher name or how much wealth they personally have.
        8y ago

manigandham 8y ago

It will ultimately also accomplish nothing except hurting publishers and giving people less relevant ads.

lawnchair_larry 8y ago
People want less relevant ads, that’s the point.
- manigandham 8y ago
  They want less ads, not irrelevant ones. Relevancy is the #2 complaint by consumers about ads.
  - stephenr 8y ago
    If ads were relevant to the topic of the site, and had no creepy follow-you-around-the-web behaviour they’d be a lot less offensive.
    - manigandham 8y ago
      We agree. The problem isn't advertising, it's the implementation of online ads.
scarface74 8y ago
Well, they are lucky that Apple doesn’t promote its content blocking framework built into iOS. But cry me a river over publishers being hurt by less effective ads or supporting their business based on ads. Ads are bad enough on desktop with plenty of real estate. They make sites unusable on mobile. I’m going to try out Apple News+ soon. If it is any good, I’ll pay for it
- manigandham 8y ago
  You've posted the same thing dozens of times and I've replied to them before. Advertising as a concept is different from online ads as an execution. The latter is bad but there is no replacement for advertising based business models. Good for you if you pay for the news but you don't represent the billions of people on the internet and what they want, what they can afford, and how they value it is well known. Advertising isn't going anywhere.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Shouldn’t you disclaim your own biases that you are “currently working on a B2B marketing company”? I have no business interest in not wanting ads.
    - manigandham 8y ago
      I've got nothing to hide. This is my real name. Yes I'm in marketing, I'm known in the industry, I wrote about ad blocking [1], built an adblocker, spent 6 figures to test alternative payments [2], am part of every initiative to make ads better [3], and have spoken with senators to push for regulation. Does that work as a disclaimer? But what does business interest have to do with discussing advertising as a concept vs implementation? We can discuss highly technical topics with nuance but when it comes to ads, why is there such a visceral and emotional reaction? 1. https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/16/ad-blocking-a-primer/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/16/ad-blocking-a-primer/ 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19038820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19038820 3. https://instinctive.io/blog/instinctive-is-a-founding-member-of-acceptable-ads-committee https://instinctive.io/blog/instinctive-is-a-founding-member...
anoncake 8y ago
Irrelevant ads are better for customers because they dont work as well.
- manigandham 8y ago
  That makes no sense. Marketing is about efficiently matching customers with products filling their needs and wants. Advertising is the communication that makes this system work and relevancy is a core factor. Irrelevant ads only waste time and money and work against both sides.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    I’ve got a novel idea. Publishers can make content that people are willing to pay for and charge money.
    - codezero 8y ago
      They’ve tried. It isn’t as simple as that. If it were it’d happen.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        It works for newspapers that people care about -- the WSJ, NYT, and I'm sure there are others. Ads aren't working too well either with the increasing use of ad blockers -- even on mobile and Google and FB sucking all of the ad revenue up.
    - manigandham 8y ago
      It's not novel, it's been used for centuries. The industry is a lot smarter than you think. But people don't value news and can't pay anywhere near enough compared to what they consume. Ads allow people to read what they want, when they want, for how much they want, regardless of publisher name or how much wealth they personally have.
      - 8y ago