5 ms·

Why do they still think we want tracking cookies ? The ad industry should prepare for a future with no tracking instead of trying to survive with ever shadier t

by juloo 5y ago

Why do they still think we want tracking cookies ? The ad industry should prepare for a future with no tracking instead of trying to survive with ever shadier tricks, IMO. This won't work: - browsers other than Chrome will say "no tracking" by default, tracking companies won't like that - websites will ignore this, this will be known and people will be upset even more - more javascript when we want less

yoavm 5y ago
The proposal includes no JS at all, and will probably reduce the amount of JS because it replaces current cookie consent modals and banners.
- yakubin 5y ago
  It includes JS. See section "8. JavaScript-based interaction". I guess the idea is that just as you can control cookies both via HTTP headers and JS, you will be able to request consent both via HTTP headers and JS.
  - yoavm 5y ago
    My mistake. It does have an option to use JS, though it's not a requirement and it's no-JS by default.
enriquto 5y ago
> more javascript when we want less notice that if you disable javascript by default most cookie banners disappear and everything becomes better. Then you can enable it per-site if you need something in particular.
- MarcellusDrum 5y ago
  I tried that for a month, but most sites I encountered on search engines will just break or even refuse to render unless I enable JS. At first, I tried to leave the site and find an alternative, but after a while I found myself enabling JS on every site I visit that requires it, which negates the whole point.
- zeepzeep 5y ago
  You should check out uMatrix to get even more fine grained control over sites. I usually allow images on every page, that's it. Some need CSS, some need iframes, and a small subset of websites I visit are actual webapps that need javascript.
  - dmm 5y ago
    I love uMatrix but development on it has stopped so it won't receive bug fixes and it will probably stop working someday. I don't think I would recommend new users start using it. https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24532973 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24532973
    - zeepzeep 5y ago
      Yes true, but it's still working mostly and I don't have a real alternative. I want to switch to uBlock's Advanced mode which seems to do similar things, but I haven't yet.
      - chopin 5y ago
        The UI is much less clear on what is blocked or not compared to uMatrix. I definitely prefer the latter.
jeofken 5y ago
When working in that industry, the cope is thinking people are ok with it, because it’s the “price” of free web content, and consumers are choosing it over anything with a paywall. I hope free software micropayments payperview can be part of the web! Maybe with GNU Taler or Offset by Freedomlayer[0] [0] https://www.offsetcredit.org/ https://www.offsetcredit.org/
- permo-w 5y ago
  I agree. Wouldn’t we all love to go back to the old old internet, where people did things a) because they wanted to, or b) because you paid them to. Both of these things make sense and are how the world has worked for a long, long time. This vague, nebulous money from ads and tracking has all the wrong incentives. It’s not “make the best hammer” anymore, it’s “make an addictive hammer that you’ll never want to leave your hand”. TV has and had the same problem to a smaller extent, and sports are infected with it too I honestly think there’s a good case to be made for banning advertising entirely, and replacing it with a societal stipend for art and media, or at least restricting it to specific places. The back of newspapers, for example. I’m sure there are plenty of problems with and arguments against the idea, but it’s definitely worth discussing
  - jeofken 5y ago
    It’s easy to say “ban this”, but what does it mean? Government laws are nothing without enforcement, and enforcement ultimately means sending armed men to people, and if they resist and protect themselves, ultimately threatening to kill them. Ads are bad, but such force is not justified. The same with the stipend - we actually have this is my country Sweden, called “press support”. It’s a massive political tool because of the bias of the gov agency workers who administrate it. It has also been used by one party (C) to make a newspaper empire, making the party one of the richest in the world, in large part by milking these press support stipends. The same party recently had multiple pedophilia scandals, which they don’t write about in their own publications. “Man plans, God laughs” and this applies to any attempt to centrally plan economics. I personally hope Offset by Freedomlayer can be the solution to micropayments online. If only I could incentivise the author of it to make an iOS version
qwerty456127 5y ago
> Why do they still think we want tracking cookies? Some people do. I would like to see relevant ads (of good special offers especially) if somebody could guarantee the ads are going to be humble and unintrusive), the goods advertised are of high quality and no-scam, the information they get from tracking can not be seen by any 3rd party (including legal authorities) and used for any purpose other than good recommendations under any circumstances ever. When I just finished school I didn't mind cookies (and actually hoped ads relevance was going to increase and increase) because I didn't think about the dangers which come with them. There are people who still believe they have nothing to hide and don't mind relevant offers.
- permo-w 5y ago
  I’m sure you’re right that a small minority doesn’t mind being tracked and provided personalised ads, but there are other problems too. Advertising brings poor incentives for businesses, even worse than usual. Engagement is king, and product satisfaction is hardly relevant
  - fmajid 5y ago
    We know how small: 4% clicked to opt-in to IDFA tracking in iOS 14. And I suspect a large number of those are people who got confused and clicked on the wrong button.
    - permo-w 5y ago
      that’s assuming iOS users are representative of the general public
  - qwerty456127 5y ago
    I'm curious about the poor incentives for businesses advertising brings. I never imagined business is possible without advertising. If I were starting a business, I would probably target the people who don't block ads (despite the fact I myself do and help all my friends and relatives to).
presentation 5y ago
They don't think we want tracking cookies - it just doesn't matter what you want with all the incentives to track.
- mikro2nd 5y ago
  They do think that we want personalised ads, though, and tracking cookies are just the tech-at-hand that is the least-cost way to do that.
  - godshatter 5y ago
    Do we want personalized ads, though? I don't, but I suspect I'm in a small minority. If I want to purchase something, I'll go do some research. I specifically don't want ads that are designed to try to get me to purchase something I don't need based on some manipulative psychological model based on my browsing behavior. A quick search makes it apparent to me that most people do want personalized ads, or at least think they do, while at the same time most people don't want the behind-the-scenes tech that makes it possible.
    - presentation 5y ago
      I think it also doesn’t really matter if we want or don’t want them - if people are more likely to click on personalized ads (I’d be surprised if they aren’t) then they’ll do it anyway. Just so happens it sounds appealing to some.
titzer 5y ago
The ad industry has measured, and tracking means more revenue and more clicks. How much more? 2x. Not more. But 2x is 5 years of 15% "normal growth". They will absolutely not accept going back in time just 5 years in terms of revenue. They will fight to the death over every dollar.
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
They don't. They think if they keep badgering you enough you will eventually cave and say yes.

by juloo 5y ago

yoavm 5y ago

The proposal includes no JS at all, and will probably reduce the amount of JS because it replaces current cookie consent modals and banners.

yakubin 5y ago
It includes JS. See section "8. JavaScript-based interaction". I guess the idea is that just as you can control cookies both via HTTP headers and JS, you will be able to request consent both via HTTP headers and JS.
- yoavm 5y ago
  My mistake. It does have an option to use JS, though it's not a requirement and it's no-JS by default.

enriquto 5y ago

> more javascript when we want less notice that if you disable javascript by default most cookie banners disappear and everything becomes better. Then you can enable it per-site if you need something in particular.

MarcellusDrum 5y ago
I tried that for a month, but most sites I encountered on search engines will just break or even refuse to render unless I enable JS. At first, I tried to leave the site and find an alternative, but after a while I found myself enabling JS on every site I visit that requires it, which negates the whole point.
zeepzeep 5y ago
You should check out uMatrix to get even more fine grained control over sites. I usually allow images on every page, that's it. Some need CSS, some need iframes, and a small subset of websites I visit are actual webapps that need javascript.
- dmm 5y ago
  I love uMatrix but development on it has stopped so it won't receive bug fixes and it will probably stop working someday. I don't think I would recommend new users start using it. https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24532973 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24532973
  - zeepzeep 5y ago
    Yes true, but it's still working mostly and I don't have a real alternative. I want to switch to uBlock's Advanced mode which seems to do similar things, but I haven't yet.
    - chopin 5y ago
      The UI is much less clear on what is blocked or not compared to uMatrix. I definitely prefer the latter.

jeofken 5y ago

When working in that industry, the cope is thinking people are ok with it, because it’s the “price” of free web content, and consumers are choosing it over anything with a paywall. I hope free software micropayments payperview can be part of the web! Maybe with GNU Taler or Offset by Freedomlayer[0] [0] https://www.offsetcredit.org/ https://www.offsetcredit.org/

permo-w 5y ago
I agree. Wouldn’t we all love to go back to the old old internet, where people did things a) because they wanted to, or b) because you paid them to. Both of these things make sense and are how the world has worked for a long, long time. This vague, nebulous money from ads and tracking has all the wrong incentives. It’s not “make the best hammer” anymore, it’s “make an addictive hammer that you’ll never want to leave your hand”. TV has and had the same problem to a smaller extent, and sports are infected with it too I honestly think there’s a good case to be made for banning advertising entirely, and replacing it with a societal stipend for art and media, or at least restricting it to specific places. The back of newspapers, for example. I’m sure there are plenty of problems with and arguments against the idea, but it’s definitely worth discussing
- jeofken 5y ago
  It’s easy to say “ban this”, but what does it mean? Government laws are nothing without enforcement, and enforcement ultimately means sending armed men to people, and if they resist and protect themselves, ultimately threatening to kill them. Ads are bad, but such force is not justified. The same with the stipend - we actually have this is my country Sweden, called “press support”. It’s a massive political tool because of the bias of the gov agency workers who administrate it. It has also been used by one party (C) to make a newspaper empire, making the party one of the richest in the world, in large part by milking these press support stipends. The same party recently had multiple pedophilia scandals, which they don’t write about in their own publications. “Man plans, God laughs” and this applies to any attempt to centrally plan economics. I personally hope Offset by Freedomlayer can be the solution to micropayments online. If only I could incentivise the author of it to make an iOS version

qwerty456127 5y ago

> Why do they still think we want tracking cookies? Some people do. I would like to see relevant ads (of good special offers especially) if somebody could guarantee the ads are going to be humble and unintrusive), the goods advertised are of high quality and no-scam, the information they get from tracking can not be seen by any 3rd party (including legal authorities) and used for any purpose other than good recommendations under any circumstances ever. When I just finished school I didn't mind cookies (and actually hoped ads relevance was going to increase and increase) because I didn't think about the dangers which come with them. There are people who still believe they have nothing to hide and don't mind relevant offers.

permo-w 5y ago
I’m sure you’re right that a small minority doesn’t mind being tracked and provided personalised ads, but there are other problems too. Advertising brings poor incentives for businesses, even worse than usual. Engagement is king, and product satisfaction is hardly relevant
- fmajid 5y ago
  We know how small: 4% clicked to opt-in to IDFA tracking in iOS 14. And I suspect a large number of those are people who got confused and clicked on the wrong button.
  - permo-w 5y ago
    that’s assuming iOS users are representative of the general public
- qwerty456127 5y ago
  I'm curious about the poor incentives for businesses advertising brings. I never imagined business is possible without advertising. If I were starting a business, I would probably target the people who don't block ads (despite the fact I myself do and help all my friends and relatives to).

presentation 5y ago

They don't think we want tracking cookies - it just doesn't matter what you want with all the incentives to track.

mikro2nd 5y ago
They do think that we want personalised ads, though, and tracking cookies are just the tech-at-hand that is the least-cost way to do that.
- godshatter 5y ago
  Do we want personalized ads, though? I don't, but I suspect I'm in a small minority. If I want to purchase something, I'll go do some research. I specifically don't want ads that are designed to try to get me to purchase something I don't need based on some manipulative psychological model based on my browsing behavior. A quick search makes it apparent to me that most people do want personalized ads, or at least think they do, while at the same time most people don't want the behind-the-scenes tech that makes it possible.
  - presentation 5y ago
    I think it also doesn’t really matter if we want or don’t want them - if people are more likely to click on personalized ads (I’d be surprised if they aren’t) then they’ll do it anyway. Just so happens it sounds appealing to some.

titzer 5y ago

The ad industry has measured, and tracking means more revenue and more clicks. How much more? 2x. Not more. But 2x is 5 years of 15% "normal growth". They will absolutely not accept going back in time just 5 years in terms of revenue. They will fight to the death over every dollar.

TheCoelacanth 5y ago

They don't. They think if they keep badgering you enough you will eventually cave and say yes.