5 ms·
Wherefore? FB and other such platforms are much better at display ads technology, as they don't care about user privacy at all. User tracking is the only real d
by scumcity 6y ago
Wherefore? FB and other such platforms are much better at display ads technology, as they don't care about user privacy at all. User tracking is the only real discriminator when it comes to display ads, where as search queries are very discriminating.
- mtgx 6y agoI agree, considering how much money they still make with Display Ads, and its potential to make so much more, it's amazing to me how Display Ads are still like 1/10 the quality of Facebook ads as a product for advertisers, and Facebook Ads is also a mess with all the bugs and random algorithm changes they make on a weekly basis, so that's saying something. It's not just about targeting. But the algorithm is also 10x worse and the UX is 10x worse, and often it's on purpose to get as much "dumb money" as they can, while of course shooting themselves in the foot, because the better long strategy would be to actually make it a quality product that gives people results.
- llimos 6y agoDuckDuckGo claim to make significantly less money per search than Google does, which seems to disprove that search queries are enough of a discriminator on their own. Source: https://spreadprivacy.com/search-preference-menu-duckduckgo-elimination/ https://spreadprivacy.com/search-preference-menu-duckduckgo-... Despite DuckDuckGo being robustly profitable since 2014, we have been priced out of this auction because we choose to not maximize our profits by exploiting our users. In practical terms, this means our commitment to privacy and a cleaner search experience translates into less money per search. This means we must bid less relative to other, profit-maximizing companies.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- fastball 6y agoI should certainly hope that DDG makes less per search than Google, since they are just repackaging a lot of google searches.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoSearch queries are generally enough for ads, but DuckDuckGo only makes money on selling those ads, while Google also sells your person information connected to the search.
- nopeNopeNooope 6y agoWhere does Google sell personal information? That would literally be selling the crown jewels for some extra pocket money, what makes you think this is the case?
- nl 6y agoThis isn't true.
- hackerfromthefu 6y agothe Need Some Anonymity begs to differ
- nl 6y ago> the Need Some Anonymity begs to differ I don't know what this means. But Google doesn't sell data. They let you buy ads against people that match your data or requirements, and that's a pretty fundamental difference.
- sbuk 6y agoStill creepy. They still track user behaviour across sites to collate the data, so that they can put you into a neatly packaged silo for advertisers.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoYeah, I was trying to figure out how to say that Google further monetizes your search info without saying they sell your data, but gave up. It's still why Google makes more per search.
- 6y ago
- username90 6y agoCould be that DuckDuckGo users just aren't good ad targets. The big thing separating them is "hates big corporations", I could easily see advertisement for big corporations not being a big hit for this crowd.
- inopinatus 6y agoI'm a DDG user. I do not "hate big corporations". I may dislike some big corporations. I've enthusiastically worked for others. I hate poverty, injustice, and bigotry. I cannot stir up strong feelings about an advertising company. On the other hand I am a terrible advertising target, not wholly impervious to advertising but actively resistant, in part having seen under the bonnet of the sector and found little but a morass of grubby lies and folks with broken moral compasses. I intentionally interpret advertising as noise, not signal. (corollary: attempts to disguise advertising are an irritant and a cognitive burden, so I allocate advertorials, content marketing, and drip-email compaigns to the Brand Damage circle of hell)
- paulgb 6y agoMaybe, but one big difference I notice between the two is that a search for <brand> on Google often has the top result as an ad for that brand, whereas on DDG it will be the same result but not an ad. It seems that brands don't have to “defend their turf” on DDG by buying ads on their own name as they do for Google.
- dhimes 6y agoI wonder if DuckDuckGo would be more successful if it was easier to find out how to advertise with them. Like, a link on the page that says "Advertise on Duck Duck Go." I've tried to advertise with them in the past a few times and gave up. I posted here before also, as I think Gabriel used to read the pages. I use them for search as my default, and I would have used them for ads. I still might if they put a link there.
- cpeterso 6y agoFrom what I've heard, DuckDuckGo sources its ads from Bing. I searched for "camera" on DuckDuckGo and the ad links have URLs that redirect to Bing, e.g. "https://duckduckgo.com/y.js?ad_provider=bingv7aa&u3=https://www.bing.com/ https://duckduckgo.com/y.js?ad_provider=bingv7aa&u3=https://......".
- AJ007 6y agoI would like to see data on Google's revenue distribution per user, guessing it would be very lopsided. Some users are clicking ads for 50%+ of their searches. DuckDuckGo users are different because they most likely at minimum know the difference between a search result and an ad.
- stjohnswarts 6y agoThere's no way that "some users" (implying a significant proportion) are clicking ads 50% of the time after they do a search. that would be a very rare duck indeed.
- nitrogen 6y agoWe've heard of this pattern: 1. Search Facebook login 2. Click first link This user probably clicks a lot of ads.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]