3 ms·

I'm honestly ok with ads, I am not ok with "personalised" ads

by erdo 5y ago

jjbinx007 5y ago
Indeed. If I buy a magazine then ads are targeted at readers of the magazine but they don't track me, invade my privacy, follow me around wherever I go or occasionally try to hijack me. If a newspaper or online magazine had traditional ads that were embedded in the page as static images (no distracting video please) then I'd leave my ad blocker off.
- WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
  Careful what you wish for. I go to a local website for local news, and they display five big banners which you must scroll through — one and a half screen — before you get to see the actual content, headline included. True, those are not targeted ads, they are sponsored content, but I wouldn’t even bother setting up my adblocker, had they made them less annoying.
ikornaselur 5y ago
It always surprises me when people say that they're fine with personalised ads, even going so far as saying that if they're getting ads they want them to be personalised. I guess I _can_ understand why, they want them to be potentially useful if they're seeing them... To me though, sure, show me ads, fine, whatever, but don't build them around a profile of me to try to manipulate me directly based on my potential interests and behaviour. Any time I can disable any "personalisation" of ads, I do.
- sjwright 5y ago
  I just don’t like the idea of having my own devices conspire against me to compromise my own privacy.
- zo1 5y ago
  I would be fine with actual personalized ads. Hell, I'd give them even more data if they needed it to accomplish such a feat. But the best they can do is try sell me washing machines after I've already purchased one, or show me youtube snippets of scenes from Netflix shows I've watched recently (yes this one really did happen. No idea how, still checking).
- foxhop 5y ago
  "I'm fine with being manipulated with supernormal stimulus." aka being profiled and then targeted with ads.
- nulbyte 5y ago
  > It always surprises me when people say that they're fine with personalised ads I think there's a bit of a language barrier. What advertisers mean when they say "personalized" or "relevant" is not the same as what their audience means when they use the same words. I find advertisers often mean "what you looked at but didn't buy," but I think most consumers mean "what is likely to interest me."
nirui 5y ago
I use many Google services, and generated many records on their platform such as payment, cloud computing service, email, file storage. That is a lots of information, making me slowly losing my confidence on whether or not I can recover if someday Google turn their back on me. My opinion is, if DDG is showing me some ads based on my search keywords (which is sort personalised) so they can make some money out of their not-so-bad service? Fine by me.

I'm honestly ok with ads, I am not ok with "personalised" ads

by erdo 5y ago

I'm honestly ok with ads, I am not ok with "personalised" ads

Indeed. If I buy a magazine then ads are targeted at readers of the magazine but they don't track me, invade my privacy, follow me around wherever I go or occasionally try to hijack me. If a newspaper or online magazine had traditional ads that were embedded in the page as static images (no distracting video please) then I'd leave my ad blocker off.

WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
Careful what you wish for. I go to a local website for local news, and they display five big banners which you must scroll through — one and a half screen — before you get to see the actual content, headline included. True, those are not targeted ads, they are sponsored content, but I wouldn’t even bother setting up my adblocker, had they made them less annoying.

ikornaselur 5y ago

It always surprises me when people say that they're fine with personalised ads, even going so far as saying that if they're getting ads they want them to be personalised. I guess I _can_ understand why, they want them to be potentially useful if they're seeing them... To me though, sure, show me ads, fine, whatever, but don't build them around a profile of me to try to manipulate me directly based on my potential interests and behaviour. Any time I can disable any "personalisation" of ads, I do.

sjwright 5y ago
I just don’t like the idea of having my own devices conspire against me to compromise my own privacy.
zo1 5y ago
I would be fine with actual personalized ads. Hell, I'd give them even more data if they needed it to accomplish such a feat. But the best they can do is try sell me washing machines after I've already purchased one, or show me youtube snippets of scenes from Netflix shows I've watched recently (yes this one really did happen. No idea how, still checking).
foxhop 5y ago
"I'm fine with being manipulated with supernormal stimulus." aka being profiled and then targeted with ads.
nulbyte 5y ago
> It always surprises me when people say that they're fine with personalised ads I think there's a bit of a language barrier. What advertisers mean when they say "personalized" or "relevant" is not the same as what their audience means when they use the same words. I find advertisers often mean "what you looked at but didn't buy," but I think most consumers mean "what is likely to interest me."

nirui 5y ago

I use many Google services, and generated many records on their platform such as payment, cloud computing service, email, file storage. That is a lots of information, making me slowly losing my confidence on whether or not I can recover if someday Google turn their back on me. My opinion is, if DDG is showing me some ads based on my search keywords (which is sort personalised) so they can make some money out of their not-so-bad service? Fine by me.