7 ms·

I bet that out of the remaining 4%, a non-negligible fraction are mis-clicks, users accidentally opting in to tracking. Who in their right mind, when given thi

I bet that out of the remaining 4%, a non-negligible fraction are mis-clicks, users accidentally opting in to tracking. Who in their right mind, when given this choice, allows themselves to be tracked?

ipaddr 6y ago
4% seems extremely low probably a miscount. If the majority of these users are looking for privacy they probably wouldn't trust facebook with their data in the first place. The reason seems to be the stats are not being properly counted by this company. Apple will need to confirm the numbers.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  Most people probably assume facebook’s tracking stops at “of course they track the information/photos I choose to post”.
- ashtonbaker 6y ago
  I think people accept tracking because they feel like they don’t have a choice. But when the choice is as easy as a button, they happily opt out.
  - datavirtue 6y ago
    Exactly. This is the same reason Facebook won't let users moderate content.
  - dorchadas 6y ago
    I don't even believe it's because they feel they don't have a choice -- I think it's more they don't realize the data Facebook et al collect (or that it's even collecting data). So when Apple asks if they want to be tracked, they say no because they don't want to be tracked but didn't realize it before. A lot of people don't realize they track you across websites etc, even if it might seem obvious to us.
    - ashtonbaker 6y ago
      Agreed, it’s a default choice with vague implications to the average person.
- hugi 6y ago
  The number sounds about right to me. Why would I click a button that says "allow Mark Zuckerberg to gather my private data"? How is that not just a pure negative for me? I use the Facebook website from time to time, which I accept is kind of duplicitous, knowing the data they gather from those sessions will be abused. But my browser is configured to disable everything Facebook on sites other than Facebook (comments, "social plugins" etc) so at least it's confined and done explicitly by me, with my knowledge.
  - ponyous 6y ago
    > "allow Mark Zuckerberg to gather my private data" Because that's exactly what it says... Consider "Would you like to improve FB experience by sharing how you use the app?" You are a tech dude and read it the same, but it's not the same.
    - twobitshifter 6y ago
      Apple clearly writes the acceptance policy but Facebook has a begging screen that pops up in front. Apple asks you if you want to allow Facebook to track you across other websites and apps. This is not telemetry, but ad-profiling. Facebook can still log everything you do within Facebook, it’s the stuff outside of Facebook that they’re been blocked from seeing.
- orbital-decay 6y ago
  >If the majority of these users are looking for privacy they probably wouldn't trust facebook with their data in the first place. This assumes they know and care that they're being tracked. Once faced with a clear choice without any dark patterns, it's fairly obvious that most users will select no tracking, unless the (supposed or real) benefits of being tracked are also explained to them. With the default Facebook behavior, they simply aren't being reminded of it. Out of sight, out of mind. It's been known forever that opt-in data collection is almost useless, because the overwhelming majority of users won't allow it if they have the choice, regardless of the expertise. In fact, it's the reason for the current state of things - the telemetry and tracking of all sorts are being forced by default in most of the software and services with no option to disable it.
- mnd999 6y ago
  For me the setting to even allow them to ask for tracking was off by default. I would have had to have found some buried setting and changed it to even get the pop up. I would have had to be pretty keen on being tracked to do that.
pydry 6y ago
>Who in their right mind, when given this choice, allows themselves to be tracked? Credulous people who believe that Facebook might start charging them to see photos of their grandchildren.
- icemelt8 6y ago
  people who have nothing to hide? I always click on Allow optional tracking to better serve software, its a way of giving back.
  - RHSeeger 6y ago
    > people who have nothing to hide There are no such people. Rather, there are only people who don't realize they have things to hide.
    - benjohnson 6y ago
      I have ideas that were considered mainstream ten years ago, but are now verboten and only shared in private.
      - tux3 6y ago
        Mooom! Grandpa is doing it again! ;)
  - linspace 6y ago
    I don't believe ads are evil necessarily but the "nothing to hide" reasoning is simply wrong. I think most people opting out of tracking is because they feel manipulated. Isn't it the ultimate reason of marketing after all?
  - the_snooze 6y ago
    >its a way of giving back These companies aren't charities.
  - dmitriid 6y ago
uberswe 6y ago
I work with a senior front end dev and noticed he wasn’t using any kind of adblocker on his work computer and it surprised me as he was privacy concerned. He said he wants to see the web like the average user and doesn’t want anything to change the default look. I’m sure there are people who have similar reasons for allowing tracking.
- uberswe 6y ago
  We also assume it’s all real users and not bots managing to opt in.
  - 542458 6y ago
    True, if you’re running a clickfarm a higher CPC means more revenue, and that means no adblocking and opting in to all tracking... although maybe that makes it easier to identify you as a clickfarm?
- draw_down 6y ago
  I do that on work computers for the same reason. However in this instance if 96% of people have it enabled then that is the baseline experience.
- tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
  But if 94% a of users disable tracking the average user experience would be with tracking disabled.
  - NullPrefix 6y ago
    You're on your own if you change or disable something. Windows (used to) (unintentionally) degrade experience if you reduce telemetry settings.
    - tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
      That doesn't sound like an useful mindset. If you want to do something which works well for your users, but then run with some unusual configuration and tell the users that "they are on their one" when they use the most common config, well, then that just makes no sense.
thinkharderdev 6y ago
It is suspiciously close tot he "Lizardman Constant" of 4% https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and....
vbezhenar 6y ago
If Facebook would ask me, I'd opt in to tracking, as I prefer targeted ads over untargeted ads. But I'm too lazy to manually enable that setting, so I'm in 96%.
- johnwheeler 6y ago
  This is where I’m at as well. I prefer targeted ads and have discovered a lot of things I wouldn’t have otherwise. For me it’s not that I’m lazy, but when you’re specifically asked if you want to be tracked there’s an innate sense of danger that arises and your brain tells you to say “no”
  - moxvallix 6y ago
    The thing with targeted ads is that you don't discover the thing, the thing discovers you. I'd argue theres good reason your brain is raising red flags when you are asked if you want to allow these manipulative processes to continue.
- wolverine876 6y ago
  Some focus only on the upside, more relevant ads, some only on the downside, lost privacy. How do you balance the two?
  - guerrilla 6y ago
    I don't see more relevant ads as an upside. I'd rather see totally irrelevant ads since they're much less likely to have an impact on me. They can waste their effort trying to manipulate me to spend unnecessarily on things I'll never buy.
  - vbezhenar 6y ago
    I never had any significant issues taking over my privacy to corporations, so that does not really bother me. I know that this kind of data in corporations is guarded good enough so leaks are unlikely. I know that those corporations won't cooperate with my government, so that's a non-issue for me as well (might be an issue for US citizens, I guess). So the whole privacy debate looks to me strange, that's not the things that bother me in my life. But that's just my PoV.
tjpnz 6y ago
I've seen very similar ratios on YouTube for likes to dislikes, you'll see it on videos where the subject should be innocuous - typically anything animal related. While it's impossible to know what proportion of the dislikes were from misclicks I would bet on it being relatively high.

ipaddr 6y ago

4% seems extremely low probably a miscount. If the majority of these users are looking for privacy they probably wouldn't trust facebook with their data in the first place. The reason seems to be the stats are not being properly counted by this company. Apple will need to confirm the numbers.

germinalphrase 6y ago
Most people probably assume facebook’s tracking stops at “of course they track the information/photos I choose to post”.
ashtonbaker 6y ago
I think people accept tracking because they feel like they don’t have a choice. But when the choice is as easy as a button, they happily opt out.
- datavirtue 6y ago
  Exactly. This is the same reason Facebook won't let users moderate content.
- dorchadas 6y ago
  I don't even believe it's because they feel they don't have a choice -- I think it's more they don't realize the data Facebook et al collect (or that it's even collecting data). So when Apple asks if they want to be tracked, they say no because they don't want to be tracked but didn't realize it before. A lot of people don't realize they track you across websites etc, even if it might seem obvious to us.
  - ashtonbaker 6y ago
    Agreed, it’s a default choice with vague implications to the average person.
hugi 6y ago
The number sounds about right to me. Why would I click a button that says "allow Mark Zuckerberg to gather my private data"? How is that not just a pure negative for me? I use the Facebook website from time to time, which I accept is kind of duplicitous, knowing the data they gather from those sessions will be abused. But my browser is configured to disable everything Facebook on sites other than Facebook (comments, "social plugins" etc) so at least it's confined and done explicitly by me, with my knowledge.
- ponyous 6y ago
  > "allow Mark Zuckerberg to gather my private data" Because that's exactly what it says... Consider "Would you like to improve FB experience by sharing how you use the app?" You are a tech dude and read it the same, but it's not the same.
  - twobitshifter 6y ago
    Apple clearly writes the acceptance policy but Facebook has a begging screen that pops up in front. Apple asks you if you want to allow Facebook to track you across other websites and apps. This is not telemetry, but ad-profiling. Facebook can still log everything you do within Facebook, it’s the stuff outside of Facebook that they’re been blocked from seeing.
orbital-decay 6y ago
>If the majority of these users are looking for privacy they probably wouldn't trust facebook with their data in the first place. This assumes they know and care that they're being tracked. Once faced with a clear choice without any dark patterns, it's fairly obvious that most users will select no tracking, unless the (supposed or real) benefits of being tracked are also explained to them. With the default Facebook behavior, they simply aren't being reminded of it. Out of sight, out of mind. It's been known forever that opt-in data collection is almost useless, because the overwhelming majority of users won't allow it if they have the choice, regardless of the expertise. In fact, it's the reason for the current state of things - the telemetry and tracking of all sorts are being forced by default in most of the software and services with no option to disable it.
mnd999 6y ago
For me the setting to even allow them to ask for tracking was off by default. I would have had to have found some buried setting and changed it to even get the pop up. I would have had to be pretty keen on being tracked to do that.

pydry 6y ago

>Who in their right mind, when given this choice, allows themselves to be tracked? Credulous people who believe that Facebook might start charging them to see photos of their grandchildren.

icemelt8 6y ago
people who have nothing to hide? I always click on Allow optional tracking to better serve software, its a way of giving back.
- RHSeeger 6y ago
  > people who have nothing to hide There are no such people. Rather, there are only people who don't realize they have things to hide.
  - benjohnson 6y ago
    I have ideas that were considered mainstream ten years ago, but are now verboten and only shared in private.
    - tux3 6y ago
      Mooom! Grandpa is doing it again! ;)
- linspace 6y ago
  I don't believe ads are evil necessarily but the "nothing to hide" reasoning is simply wrong. I think most people opting out of tracking is because they feel manipulated. Isn't it the ultimate reason of marketing after all?
- the_snooze 6y ago
  >its a way of giving back These companies aren't charities.
- dmitriid 6y ago

uberswe 6y ago

I work with a senior front end dev and noticed he wasn’t using any kind of adblocker on his work computer and it surprised me as he was privacy concerned. He said he wants to see the web like the average user and doesn’t want anything to change the default look. I’m sure there are people who have similar reasons for allowing tracking.

uberswe 6y ago
We also assume it’s all real users and not bots managing to opt in.
- 542458 6y ago
  True, if you’re running a clickfarm a higher CPC means more revenue, and that means no adblocking and opting in to all tracking... although maybe that makes it easier to identify you as a clickfarm?
draw_down 6y ago
I do that on work computers for the same reason. However in this instance if 96% of people have it enabled then that is the baseline experience.
tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
But if 94% a of users disable tracking the average user experience would be with tracking disabled.
- NullPrefix 6y ago
  You're on your own if you change or disable something. Windows (used to) (unintentionally) degrade experience if you reduce telemetry settings.
  - tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
    That doesn't sound like an useful mindset. If you want to do something which works well for your users, but then run with some unusual configuration and tell the users that "they are on their one" when they use the most common config, well, then that just makes no sense.

thinkharderdev 6y ago

It is suspiciously close tot he "Lizardman Constant" of 4% https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and....

vbezhenar 6y ago

If Facebook would ask me, I'd opt in to tracking, as I prefer targeted ads over untargeted ads. But I'm too lazy to manually enable that setting, so I'm in 96%.

johnwheeler 6y ago
This is where I’m at as well. I prefer targeted ads and have discovered a lot of things I wouldn’t have otherwise. For me it’s not that I’m lazy, but when you’re specifically asked if you want to be tracked there’s an innate sense of danger that arises and your brain tells you to say “no”
- moxvallix 6y ago
  The thing with targeted ads is that you don't discover the thing, the thing discovers you. I'd argue theres good reason your brain is raising red flags when you are asked if you want to allow these manipulative processes to continue.
wolverine876 6y ago
Some focus only on the upside, more relevant ads, some only on the downside, lost privacy. How do you balance the two?
- guerrilla 6y ago
  I don't see more relevant ads as an upside. I'd rather see totally irrelevant ads since they're much less likely to have an impact on me. They can waste their effort trying to manipulate me to spend unnecessarily on things I'll never buy.
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  I never had any significant issues taking over my privacy to corporations, so that does not really bother me. I know that this kind of data in corporations is guarded good enough so leaks are unlikely. I know that those corporations won't cooperate with my government, so that's a non-issue for me as well (might be an issue for US citizens, I guess). So the whole privacy debate looks to me strange, that's not the things that bother me in my life. But that's just my PoV.

tjpnz 6y ago

I've seen very similar ratios on YouTube for likes to dislikes, you'll see it on videos where the subject should be innocuous - typically anything animal related. While it's impossible to know what proportion of the dislikes were from misclicks I would bet on it being relatively high.