3 ms·

Thank for the disclosure. 1. Are there legitimate safe spaces for people who like friction? Or are they only for people who LARP as Don Draper and Jordan Belfo

Thank for the disclosure. 1. Are there legitimate safe spaces for people who like friction? Or are they only for people who LARP as Don Draper and Jordan Belfort? 2. How was/is cheating in this sense addressed in print advertisements? 3. This makes sense, but I think the alternative would call for more friction and ethical data collection/sharing on behalf of personalization. 4. The last sentence was the most helpful. Who is the "network" in question? (Now for my disclosure: If you can't tell I need to sit down and figure out how the online ad business actually works, I likely can count on my hands many times I've ever clicked an ad online and I've definitely purchased something in that manner far less if ever). Thank you!

jefftk 6y ago
1: I don't think it's very common. I have a blogger friend who used to host simple image ads, but then they migrated to substack. 2: The primary method of cheating in print was lying about your circulation numbers. Anyone could easily verify that the ad was run in the agreed on spot, but the question of how many people read your paper/magazine is harder. In the US circulation numbers typically come from the nonprofit Alliance for Audited Media (formerly the Audit Bureau of Circulation). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_circulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_circulation 3: The world is moving in that direction, but not especially because advertisers or publishers are pushing for it. Instead it's consumer advocacy groups and browsers. My primary project at work right now is (along with a lot of other people) figuring out how we can serve personalized ads without cross-site tracking (https://github.com/WICG/turtledove https://github.com/WICG/turtledove). 4: An ad network is a middleman between advertisers and publishers. Directly connecting pairs of publishers (P) and advertisers (A) scales at O(PA) while publishers and advertisers both connecting to a network scales at O(P+A). AdSense would be an example: an advertiser who signs up with AdSense can advertise across all its publishers without needing to make 1:1 deals. (Still speaking only for myself)
- ibn_khaldun 6y ago
  Thank you, Jeff.

jefftk 6y ago

1: I don't think it's very common. I have a blogger friend who used to host simple image ads, but then they migrated to substack. 2: The primary method of cheating in print was lying about your circulation numbers. Anyone could easily verify that the ad was run in the agreed on spot, but the question of how many people read your paper/magazine is harder. In the US circulation numbers typically come from the nonprofit Alliance for Audited Media (formerly the Audit Bureau of Circulation). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_circulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_circulation 3: The world is moving in that direction, but not especially because advertisers or publishers are pushing for it. Instead it's consumer advocacy groups and browsers. My primary project at work right now is (along with a lot of other people) figuring out how we can serve personalized ads without cross-site tracking (https://github.com/WICG/turtledove https://github.com/WICG/turtledove). 4: An ad network is a middleman between advertisers and publishers. Directly connecting pairs of publishers (P) and advertisers (A) scales at O(PA) while publishers and advertisers both connecting to a network scales at O(P+A). AdSense would be an example: an advertiser who signs up with AdSense can advertise across all its publishers without needing to make 1:1 deals. (Still speaking only for myself)

ibn_khaldun 6y ago
Thank you, Jeff.