8 ms·

When you actually look at the sites, it's clear Brave hasn't done their homework or don't really understand the online ad ecosystem. For example, Enfield counc

by mpeg 7y ago

When you actually look at the sites, it's clear Brave hasn't done their homework or don't really understand the online ad ecosystem. For example, Enfield council ( enfield.gov.uk ) is using Google's ad server (DFP) set to show only internal ads. All their advertising is for cross-promoting projects and sites that Enfield council is involved with, including pest control, social lettings, a publicly-funded golf course, school meals... It's not showing ads from GDN (Google Display Network) or elsewhere, it seems to only show these internal promotions.

jszymborski 7y ago
Right, but are you suggesting that the Google ad servers are not going to use that information to sell to these visitors on other websites that are showing ads from the GDN?
- eclipxe 7y ago
  Correct
  - ulimn 7y ago
    Incorrect
- mpeg 7y ago
  I'm not a Google fan by any means, but DFP is the #1 ad server in the world and an industry standard, and I definitely don't think they would use DFP data to populate GDN segments because it would be a privacy nightmare. You have to consider DFP is a software tool, it would be like Slack selling your data so other SaaS can target you when you are talking about buying a new CMS.
  - jszymborski 7y ago
    "it would be a privacy nightmare." Right, but being a privacy nightmare is their business plan
eclipxe 7y ago
Brave's business model is fear mongering.
- tssva 7y ago
  And extortion.
  - wnoise 7y ago
    Extortion would be threatening to reveal bad acts, in order to gain something from those threatened. If they always reveal bad acts, and don't even try to gain anything from the bad actors -- well, that's just plainly not extortion, nor even criminal in any way.
    - tssva 7y ago
      That would be blackmail. Extortion is "the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats." Brave extorts websites by threatening to block the site's choosen revenue stream and to instead earn revenues from visitors to the site unless the site uses Brave to funnel their revenues. I don't have an issue with ad blockers or alternative payment methods but the way Brave combines the two in my opinion amounts to extortion.
      - wnoise 7y ago
        Sure, I was focusing on the blackmail subset of extortion, because (a) this posting was discussing their releasing of information and (b) they can't actually use any force or threats of force. Helping their users decline to provide tracking information on unless they and their users get a cut is also not extortion, because the website owners don't have a right to that information. You seem to believe that owners of websites have a natural right to their chosen business model, even if others don't wish to help enable that business model.
- gowld 7y ago
  What's the difference betwen fear mongering and educating about risks?
rtb 7y ago
I think they understand it fine. As you say, the website is using Google's ad server. So it is sending detailed identifying info about each user to Google. Just because that has become normal for "the online ad ecosystem" over the past few years doesn't mean that it should be acceptable or that we cannot try to stop it.
- mpeg 7y ago
  What is the alternative here? Should Enfield spend tax payer money creating an alternative tool to show banner ad cross-promotions and re-training their teams? Where do you stop? Is Google Analytics evil too? What about Twitter feeds?
  - Hoasi 7y ago
    > Is Google Analytics evil too? What about Twitter feeds? Yes. Both bad.
  - dboreham 7y ago
    Sounds like a great business opportunity especially if we can lobby politicians to require "surveillance-free" services be used.
  - rtb 7y ago
    The alternative is to not show ads. Yes, Google Analytics has many of the same problems. The alternative to that is to analyze the server logs or to simply not track your users' behaviour in detail.
    - ddalex 7y ago
      > to simply not track your users' behaviour in detail that's unpossible
  - chriswarbo 7y ago
    > Where do you stop? Is Google Analytics evil too? Absolutely. > What about Twitter feeds? In what context? Including/embedding Twitter cookies and/or Javascript in pages paid-for by citizens, which citizens are required to use to exercise their rights? Absolutely. As a non-exclusive outlet to disseminate information via an independent site (twitter.com), which anyone is free to avoid and ignore? That's fine.
frou_dh 7y ago
In the PDF, this is the example of the banner ad they show: https://i.imgur.com/qwuU5Sx.png https://i.imgur.com/qwuU5Sx.png So the banner ads being strictly council related is certainly not universal.
weekay 7y ago
You are missing the fact that Enfield council has RTB House , Criteo retargeting , Tru Optik demand side platform , OpenX , Districtm, msecnd , doubleclick , omnitag integrated as 3rd party. This doesnt make sense if the intent was purely to show internal ads. The implementation here seems to be no different to any other news site. As a visitor to the council website , I would expect that the same privacy levels and UX as that of gov.uk sites.
- velox_io 7y ago
  GDS are bringing them together, slowly... I recently applied for Personal Independence Payments (PIP). And despite being a new 'system' plus the assessments are carried out by two large IT outsourcing companies (Capita & Atos). It is entirely paper-based (drive.google is blocked, they don't take emails...). If you request a copy of the report they photocopy the physical file and post it. They are so backwards it is unreal. Plus there's no provisions for an alternative format to the 30 page paper form. Not very independent if handwriting is an issue (the target demographic is people with disabilities). Don't get me started on the actual assessment/ assessor. (it's been a long day going through this stuff).
shaoonb 7y ago
Why does Enfield council need to use adtech tracking to optimise their ads for other services? It's not like they are competing with anyone to deliver the most efficient services by fractions of a percent. Surely basic keyword targeted or completely untargeted ads are all they need.

by mpeg 7y ago

jszymborski 7y ago

Right, but are you suggesting that the Google ad servers are not going to use that information to sell to these visitors on other websites that are showing ads from the GDN?

eclipxe 7y ago
Correct
- ulimn 7y ago
  Incorrect
mpeg 7y ago
I'm not a Google fan by any means, but DFP is the #1 ad server in the world and an industry standard, and I definitely don't think they would use DFP data to populate GDN segments because it would be a privacy nightmare. You have to consider DFP is a software tool, it would be like Slack selling your data so other SaaS can target you when you are talking about buying a new CMS.
- jszymborski 7y ago
  "it would be a privacy nightmare." Right, but being a privacy nightmare is their business plan

eclipxe 7y ago

Brave's business model is fear mongering.

tssva 7y ago
And extortion.
- wnoise 7y ago
  Extortion would be threatening to reveal bad acts, in order to gain something from those threatened. If they always reveal bad acts, and don't even try to gain anything from the bad actors -- well, that's just plainly not extortion, nor even criminal in any way.
  - tssva 7y ago
    That would be blackmail. Extortion is "the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats." Brave extorts websites by threatening to block the site's choosen revenue stream and to instead earn revenues from visitors to the site unless the site uses Brave to funnel their revenues. I don't have an issue with ad blockers or alternative payment methods but the way Brave combines the two in my opinion amounts to extortion.
    - wnoise 7y ago
      Sure, I was focusing on the blackmail subset of extortion, because (a) this posting was discussing their releasing of information and (b) they can't actually use any force or threats of force. Helping their users decline to provide tracking information on unless they and their users get a cut is also not extortion, because the website owners don't have a right to that information. You seem to believe that owners of websites have a natural right to their chosen business model, even if others don't wish to help enable that business model.
gowld 7y ago
What's the difference betwen fear mongering and educating about risks?

rtb 7y ago

I think they understand it fine. As you say, the website is using Google's ad server. So it is sending detailed identifying info about each user to Google. Just because that has become normal for "the online ad ecosystem" over the past few years doesn't mean that it should be acceptable or that we cannot try to stop it.

mpeg 7y ago
What is the alternative here? Should Enfield spend tax payer money creating an alternative tool to show banner ad cross-promotions and re-training their teams? Where do you stop? Is Google Analytics evil too? What about Twitter feeds?
- Hoasi 7y ago
  > Is Google Analytics evil too? What about Twitter feeds? Yes. Both bad.
- dboreham 7y ago
  Sounds like a great business opportunity especially if we can lobby politicians to require "surveillance-free" services be used.
- rtb 7y ago
  The alternative is to not show ads. Yes, Google Analytics has many of the same problems. The alternative to that is to analyze the server logs or to simply not track your users' behaviour in detail.
  - ddalex 7y ago
    > to simply not track your users' behaviour in detail that's unpossible
- chriswarbo 7y ago
  > Where do you stop? Is Google Analytics evil too? Absolutely. > What about Twitter feeds? In what context? Including/embedding Twitter cookies and/or Javascript in pages paid-for by citizens, which citizens are required to use to exercise their rights? Absolutely. As a non-exclusive outlet to disseminate information via an independent site (twitter.com), which anyone is free to avoid and ignore? That's fine.

frou_dh 7y ago

In the PDF, this is the example of the banner ad they show: https://i.imgur.com/qwuU5Sx.png https://i.imgur.com/qwuU5Sx.png So the banner ads being strictly council related is certainly not universal.

weekay 7y ago

You are missing the fact that Enfield council has RTB House , Criteo retargeting , Tru Optik demand side platform , OpenX , Districtm, msecnd , doubleclick , omnitag integrated as 3rd party. This doesnt make sense if the intent was purely to show internal ads. The implementation here seems to be no different to any other news site. As a visitor to the council website , I would expect that the same privacy levels and UX as that of gov.uk sites.

velox_io 7y ago
GDS are bringing them together, slowly... I recently applied for Personal Independence Payments (PIP). And despite being a new 'system' plus the assessments are carried out by two large IT outsourcing companies (Capita & Atos). It is entirely paper-based (drive.google is blocked, they don't take emails...). If you request a copy of the report they photocopy the physical file and post it. They are so backwards it is unreal. Plus there's no provisions for an alternative format to the 30 page paper form. Not very independent if handwriting is an issue (the target demographic is people with disabilities). Don't get me started on the actual assessment/ assessor. (it's been a long day going through this stuff).

shaoonb 7y ago

Why does Enfield council need to use adtech tracking to optimise their ads for other services? It's not like they are competing with anyone to deliver the most efficient services by fractions of a percent. Surely basic keyword targeted or completely untargeted ads are all they need.