8 ms·

> FLoC is an engineering solution to a political problem. Yes. > the problem with targeted advertising is the targeting Is it? The problem with advertisemen

> FLoC is an engineering solution to a political problem. Yes. > the problem with targeted advertising is the targeting Is it? The problem with advertisement is the advertisement. I don't like to see ads at all, but one thing I know for sure, I'd take targeted ads at all time over random ads. > People don't like seeing their web history funnel into their advertising. No. This is the problem YOU have with it. Most of the non-tech people I know have no idea what you are even talking about.

gwbas1c 6y ago
You must have no shame. My wife buys diapers online, then ads for diapers show up on my computer. I go shopping for underwear on one device, and then when reading a technical forum with co-workers on a different device, there's ads with people just wearing underwear. The tracking is extremely excessive.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  That’s just the algorithm telling you to be more involved in childcare.
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    I assume it's already been written but I've said and I'll say again that the 1984 of the future will be set in or around some kind of algorithmic dystopia. I'm specifically thinking a corporate one although China... Maybe I should be the change and write it myself
- jokethrowaway 6y ago
  uBlock is free
criddell 6y ago
I don't think the choice is between personally targeted ads and random ads though. There are middle options. For example, if I search for "how to do a Subaru oil change" it's the perfect opportunity for the search engine to show me ads related to motor oil, Subarus, car maintenance videos, etc... If I opt in to sharing my location with the search engine they could also show me ads from local repair shops and car dealers. Later on when I'm reading an article about dog training, I don't want to see ads about fixing my car, show me ads related to dogs. Use the context of the page for targeting.
- ssivark 6y ago
  Sure, but what about showing you ads for WhatsApp when you’re searching for Signal? Where does contextual advertising/influencing switch from being helpful to being gaslighting?
  - t0astbread 6y ago
    Aren't ads always about giving one competitor an advantage regardless of any objective benefits for the consumer? (With the exception of PSAs and the like.)
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Sure, search does really well for contextual because there is lots of intent. But most other contextual is not like that: people aren't looking to buy something. Your normal usage isn't dog training or subaru oil changes. It's idle nonsense like whether Kim Kardashian is angry with Courtney Cox or whatever. There's not enough to sell you that's contextual. People have an idealized vision of what they spend time on. It's nothing like this productive stuff you're talking about.
  - criddell 6y ago
    > There's not enough to sell you that's contextual. Next time you are in a waiting room flip through the magazines that are sitting there. The ads are targeted to the likely readers of those magazines.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      No volume. Hard for small guy to use. Online targeted ads are way better. Not to be annoying, but advertising is serious money. If you think you can do good contextual advertising you will become rich very easily. Anyone will. It's hard for me to believe that no one is doing this supposedly easy and effective thing well since all the incentives are there.
      - 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bluesign 6y ago
But the problem is we are not getting targeted ads. We are getting semi-targeted ads. If someone is paying 10 usd for conversion and you have chance to convert 1%, another one has 90% chance to convert but paying lets say 0.10 usd, even if you have 90 times better ad, ad network will show you the 1% one.
jokethrowaway 6y ago
Privacy advocates need an excuse to advocate for privacy and impose more regulations for the Common Good. Then we end up with crap like the cookie banner - which completely ruined the internet for me. There is not a day I don't have to close one of those and browser extensions to block them are nowhere as good as blocking ads. Not to mention, accepting all the cookies is one click, while rejecting them either require 1 minute of thinking or browsing through popups and menus. The fact that 99% of the people don't care is over their head. If people cared they would be using duckduckgo. Funnily enough, I use duckduckgo and I think it's a great Google replacement - but I don't care about being tracked, I just appreciate the features (especially code snippets in search)
monadic3 6y ago
> Most of the non-tech people I know have no idea what you are even talking about. People always trot this out with zero evidence. C'mon, this isn't even engaging in good faith. I am absolutely sure that if you articulate the technology and how it's used in ways people understand they would have objections. To accept otherwise is to accept that obfuscation is an acceptable way of bypassing user consent.
swiley 6y ago
>I'd take targeted ads at all time over random ads. Why? It's not the content you want and the fundamental idea behind targeted ads is precise manipulation of people's behavior which is an extremely dangerous thing to have at scale.

gwbas1c 6y ago

You must have no shame. My wife buys diapers online, then ads for diapers show up on my computer. I go shopping for underwear on one device, and then when reading a technical forum with co-workers on a different device, there's ads with people just wearing underwear. The tracking is extremely excessive.

IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
That’s just the algorithm telling you to be more involved in childcare.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  I assume it's already been written but I've said and I'll say again that the 1984 of the future will be set in or around some kind of algorithmic dystopia. I'm specifically thinking a corporate one although China... Maybe I should be the change and write it myself
jokethrowaway 6y ago
uBlock is free

criddell 6y ago

I don't think the choice is between personally targeted ads and random ads though. There are middle options. For example, if I search for "how to do a Subaru oil change" it's the perfect opportunity for the search engine to show me ads related to motor oil, Subarus, car maintenance videos, etc... If I opt in to sharing my location with the search engine they could also show me ads from local repair shops and car dealers. Later on when I'm reading an article about dog training, I don't want to see ads about fixing my car, show me ads related to dogs. Use the context of the page for targeting.

ssivark 6y ago
Sure, but what about showing you ads for WhatsApp when you’re searching for Signal? Where does contextual advertising/influencing switch from being helpful to being gaslighting?
- t0astbread 6y ago
  Aren't ads always about giving one competitor an advantage regardless of any objective benefits for the consumer? (With the exception of PSAs and the like.)
renewiltord 6y ago
Sure, search does really well for contextual because there is lots of intent. But most other contextual is not like that: people aren't looking to buy something. Your normal usage isn't dog training or subaru oil changes. It's idle nonsense like whether Kim Kardashian is angry with Courtney Cox or whatever. There's not enough to sell you that's contextual. People have an idealized vision of what they spend time on. It's nothing like this productive stuff you're talking about.
- criddell 6y ago
  > There's not enough to sell you that's contextual. Next time you are in a waiting room flip through the magazines that are sitting there. The ads are targeted to the likely readers of those magazines.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    No volume. Hard for small guy to use. Online targeted ads are way better. Not to be annoying, but advertising is serious money. If you think you can do good contextual advertising you will become rich very easily. Anyone will. It's hard for me to believe that no one is doing this supposedly easy and effective thing well since all the incentives are there.
    - 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

bluesign 6y ago

But the problem is we are not getting targeted ads. We are getting semi-targeted ads. If someone is paying 10 usd for conversion and you have chance to convert 1%, another one has 90% chance to convert but paying lets say 0.10 usd, even if you have 90 times better ad, ad network will show you the 1% one.

jokethrowaway 6y ago

Privacy advocates need an excuse to advocate for privacy and impose more regulations for the Common Good. Then we end up with crap like the cookie banner - which completely ruined the internet for me. There is not a day I don't have to close one of those and browser extensions to block them are nowhere as good as blocking ads. Not to mention, accepting all the cookies is one click, while rejecting them either require 1 minute of thinking or browsing through popups and menus. The fact that 99% of the people don't care is over their head. If people cared they would be using duckduckgo. Funnily enough, I use duckduckgo and I think it's a great Google replacement - but I don't care about being tracked, I just appreciate the features (especially code snippets in search)

monadic3 6y ago

> Most of the non-tech people I know have no idea what you are even talking about. People always trot this out with zero evidence. C'mon, this isn't even engaging in good faith. I am absolutely sure that if you articulate the technology and how it's used in ways people understand they would have objections. To accept otherwise is to accept that obfuscation is an acceptable way of bypassing user consent.

swiley 6y ago

>I'd take targeted ads at all time over random ads. Why? It's not the content you want and the fundamental idea behind targeted ads is precise manipulation of people's behavior which is an extremely dangerous thing to have at scale.