> something simple as knowing if your marketing campaign is effective becomes very hard I know I'm looking at this too simply but, fundamentally, is it not an

> something simple as knowing if your marketing campaign is effective becomes very hard I know I'm looking at this too simply but, fundamentally, is it not an increase in sales that defines the success of a marketing campaign? If the other methods of measurement are click-throughs, or verified views, or whatever else there may be, aren't these all essentially of meta-value only in comparison to actual sales? That's the perspective of a company that actually sells "things" though, do you mean from the perspective of an advertising company? There's a lot of meta going on. I guess that, from an advertising company perspective, they need stats to prove their campaigns are more effective then those of their competitors, which means they need to have more accurate or complete data on the various markets - and the more accurate and complete the data, the more invasive and present the tracking must be. What a race to the bottom. > There is a whole industry that depends on tracking IDFA to function Just because an industry exists, doesn't mean it's right. There's a whole industry that depends on the US voice carriers taking no action on spoofed number scam phone calls too.