5 ms·

Ads will definitely not disappear, only the tracking aspect. It will be more contextual ads probably, related to what page your are looking at, less related to

Ads will definitely not disappear, only the tracking aspect. It will be more contextual ads probably, related to what page your are looking at, less related to you as an individual.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
And that is both a user-respecting and effective way to advertise!
- dialtone 6y ago
  This would have been true for this change as well, clearly if Apple chose a different path means that it's not as clear cut as you imply here. And yeah contextual and stuff is nice but will simply not drive the same revenue for publishers.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    This isn't true, targeted advertising only gets publishers about 4% more revenue, despite adtech's claims it's over 50%. And when adtech is banned, revenues will stabilize around remaining activity.
    - dialtone 6y ago
      You deliberately choose to ignore all of the studies that disagree with you except the one that you agree with that has very obvious flaws. Here's a summary of the literature[1]. Personalized ads have become popular because they perform better for the buyer, and that makes buyers willing to pay more to show them to their customers. Buyer goals align with conversions. The history of advertising online started with contextual, there is zero evidence to support the claim that revenue will only drop 4% when any company submitting bids for contextual vs personalized ads can show you that the CPMs they are willing to pay can easily be 2-3x if not even higher for high worth users. [1]: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1juu6UBguR7ru1Rhfyor9knFBFsyLNP6FmIiXcJKyJZM/edit#slide=id.g604c6519b1_0_1 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1juu6UBguR7ru1Rhfyor9...
monadic2 6y ago
Not with that attitude they won't.
JoshTriplett 6y ago
> Ads will definitely not disappear, only the tracking aspect. Ads without tracking are an even less effective business model. We don't have to make ads stop working entirely, we just have to make them sufficiently ineffective that they're not worth paying enough to make ad revenue worthwhile.
Yetanfou 6y ago
Ads have effectively disappeared for a number of years now for those who use a sensible approach to ad blocking (i.e. a combination of ingress blocking, DNS blacklists and browser-based blocking). This could change if content providers start using different approaches to ad insertion - e.g. video ads merged into the original content, ads as part of original page content - but even those avenues will be neutered within not too long. It probably makes sense for ad purveyors to not fret too much over ad blocking users since these users often react negatively to advertising and as such are better left alone.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  > video ads merged into the original content That is already a thing and there are already countermeasures: https://sponsor.ajay.app https://sponsor.ajay.app
- dragonsky67 6y ago
  In most cases I find direct ad insertion (as in ad sponsership of the creator) a lot less offensive than some algorythmetic insertion based on some unknown metric. At least then the creator has to decide if the ad they are running is acceptable in their product.
  - Yetanfou 6y ago
    That isn't ad insertion but sponsorship. What I mean is for the server to present a single video stream which does not contain markers to identify advertising content, more or less the way many netcast ads are inserted into the audio stream.

Ads will definitely not disappear, only the tracking aspect. It will be more contextual ads probably, related to what page your are looking at, less related to you as an individual.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

And that is both a user-respecting and effective way to advertise!

dialtone 6y ago
This would have been true for this change as well, clearly if Apple chose a different path means that it's not as clear cut as you imply here. And yeah contextual and stuff is nice but will simply not drive the same revenue for publishers.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  This isn't true, targeted advertising only gets publishers about 4% more revenue, despite adtech's claims it's over 50%. And when adtech is banned, revenues will stabilize around remaining activity.
  - dialtone 6y ago
    You deliberately choose to ignore all of the studies that disagree with you except the one that you agree with that has very obvious flaws. Here's a summary of the literature[1]. Personalized ads have become popular because they perform better for the buyer, and that makes buyers willing to pay more to show them to their customers. Buyer goals align with conversions. The history of advertising online started with contextual, there is zero evidence to support the claim that revenue will only drop 4% when any company submitting bids for contextual vs personalized ads can show you that the CPMs they are willing to pay can easily be 2-3x if not even higher for high worth users. [1]: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1juu6UBguR7ru1Rhfyor9knFBFsyLNP6FmIiXcJKyJZM/edit#slide=id.g604c6519b1_0_1 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1juu6UBguR7ru1Rhfyor9...

monadic2 6y ago

Not with that attitude they won't.

JoshTriplett 6y ago

> Ads will definitely not disappear, only the tracking aspect. Ads without tracking are an even less effective business model. We don't have to make ads stop working entirely, we just have to make them sufficiently ineffective that they're not worth paying enough to make ad revenue worthwhile.

Yetanfou 6y ago

Ads have effectively disappeared for a number of years now for those who use a sensible approach to ad blocking (i.e. a combination of ingress blocking, DNS blacklists and browser-based blocking). This could change if content providers start using different approaches to ad insertion - e.g. video ads merged into the original content, ads as part of original page content - but even those avenues will be neutered within not too long. It probably makes sense for ad purveyors to not fret too much over ad blocking users since these users often react negatively to advertising and as such are better left alone.

Nextgrid 6y ago
> video ads merged into the original content That is already a thing and there are already countermeasures: https://sponsor.ajay.app https://sponsor.ajay.app
dragonsky67 6y ago
In most cases I find direct ad insertion (as in ad sponsership of the creator) a lot less offensive than some algorythmetic insertion based on some unknown metric. At least then the creator has to decide if the ad they are running is acceptable in their product.
- Yetanfou 6y ago
  That isn't ad insertion but sponsorship. What I mean is for the server to present a single video stream which does not contain markers to identify advertising content, more or less the way many netcast ads are inserted into the audio stream.