4 ms·

Google/Facebook doing shady things to undermine user privacy is a generally accepted fact in this community, so I think that the title understates the severity

by cowpig 5y ago

Google/Facebook doing shady things to undermine user privacy is a generally accepted fact in this community, so I think that the title understates the severity of the allegations in the article! It contends that there was collusion between Google and Facebook to protect their abuses of dominance in the marketplace: "Google quickly realized that this innovation substantially threatened its exchange’s ability to demand a very large – 19 to 22 percent – cut on all advertising transactions," ... "However, Google secretly made its own exchange win, even when another exchange submitted a higher bid," ... "And as one Google employee explained internally, Google deliberately designed Jedi to avoid competition, and Jedi consequently harmed publishers. In Google’s words, the Jedi program 'generates suboptimal yields for publishers and serious risks of negative media coverage if exposed externally.'" ... "For example, Google and Facebook have integrated their software development kits (SDKs) so that Google can pass Facebook data for user ID cookie matching," the amended complaint says. "They also coordinated with each other to harm publishers through the adoption of Unified Pricing rules…"

shawkinaw 5y ago
> It contends that there was collusion between Apple and Facebook to protect their abuses of dominance in the marketplace s/Apple/Google/
- cowpig 5y ago
  Thanks! Fixed
TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
I just wonder who in management positions thought this was a good idea (in both companies) and green lighted it?
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  Management is full of idiots
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - classified 5y ago
    As is any other field of human activity, including software development.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      I find test gateways (although they are unpopular) pretty good at selecting intelligent peers. Horizontal management transfers don't have that.
- jedberg 5y ago
  Someone whose bonus is based on profits.
  - toyg 5y ago
    And who has probably moved on already.
- LegitShady 5y ago
  Someone who gets prison time I hope.
SilasX 5y ago
> "And as one Google employee explained internally, Google deliberately designed Jedi to avoid competition, and Jedi consequently harmed publishers. In Google’s words, the Jedi program 'generates suboptimal yields for publishers and serious risks of negative media coverage if exposed externally.' Lol I guess that employee missed the training where they tell you not to put this stuff in writing.
dillondoyle 5y ago
I wonder what Google's take on this is. The system is so incomprehensibly complicated they can hide behind that. The FB relationship to me seems like it would be harder to explain away. Maybe Google could say they are including quality & spam in their winning bid selection instead of only highest price. Also conversion optimized bidding messes things up/more complicated the highest CPM might not be the best or most profitable ad for them to clear (another problem when they own all sides of the transaction). FB for instance say they take ad quality, engagement, & predicted user behaviors into account when choosing winning ads not just price - which is also transparent.. Another thing is publishers can usually set floors and optimize for specific bid sources, like newssite.com could let their IOs win bids until it's filled even at a lower CPM. Or also clear rates, like maybe an SSP bids $100 but it doesn't go through/get paid?
- cudgy 5y ago
  Good points but “ad quality” and “predicted user behaviors” are subjective and therefore not transparent.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    Making that public would enable SEO but on steroids.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure all of this is common. Every advertiser auction selects the winning bid on a combination of the bid price per click as well as the quality of the ad because per-click payment means they want to optimize for the highest expected revenue - if nobody clicks on your shitty ad, Google makes less. Then there's the added little bit around optimizing for secondary objectives like user engagement so that you don't kill the golden goose by running shocking/negative but highly clicked ads. I actually don't think the system is "incomprehensibly complicated," but it is opaque.
  - dillondoyle 5y ago
    Yup that's my take. I think this is pretty one sided, but good look explaining what we're talking about to a jury or even some DA somewhere. I have never worked at google or done anything close to the scale or complexity of building galactic sized RTB networks, but from their papers and the couple people I've talked to they put insanely impressive work into the beast. I'm sure there are all kinds of auction dynamics that I can't even imagine just because of their scale.

by cowpig 5y ago

shawkinaw 5y ago

> It contends that there was collusion between Apple and Facebook to protect their abuses of dominance in the marketplace s/Apple/Google/

cowpig 5y ago
Thanks! Fixed

TedDoesntTalk 5y ago

I just wonder who in management positions thought this was a good idea (in both companies) and green lighted it?

whimsicalism 5y ago
Management is full of idiots
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- classified 5y ago
  As is any other field of human activity, including software development.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    I find test gateways (although they are unpopular) pretty good at selecting intelligent peers. Horizontal management transfers don't have that.
jedberg 5y ago
Someone whose bonus is based on profits.
- toyg 5y ago
  And who has probably moved on already.
LegitShady 5y ago
Someone who gets prison time I hope.

SilasX 5y ago

> "And as one Google employee explained internally, Google deliberately designed Jedi to avoid competition, and Jedi consequently harmed publishers. In Google’s words, the Jedi program 'generates suboptimal yields for publishers and serious risks of negative media coverage if exposed externally.' Lol I guess that employee missed the training where they tell you not to put this stuff in writing.

dillondoyle 5y ago

I wonder what Google's take on this is. The system is so incomprehensibly complicated they can hide behind that. The FB relationship to me seems like it would be harder to explain away. Maybe Google could say they are including quality & spam in their winning bid selection instead of only highest price. Also conversion optimized bidding messes things up/more complicated the highest CPM might not be the best or most profitable ad for them to clear (another problem when they own all sides of the transaction). FB for instance say they take ad quality, engagement, & predicted user behaviors into account when choosing winning ads not just price - which is also transparent.. Another thing is publishers can usually set floors and optimize for specific bid sources, like newssite.com could let their IOs win bids until it's filled even at a lower CPM. Or also clear rates, like maybe an SSP bids $100 but it doesn't go through/get paid?

cudgy 5y ago
Good points but “ad quality” and “predicted user behaviors” are subjective and therefore not transparent.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  Making that public would enable SEO but on steroids.
whimsicalism 5y ago
I'm pretty sure all of this is common. Every advertiser auction selects the winning bid on a combination of the bid price per click as well as the quality of the ad because per-click payment means they want to optimize for the highest expected revenue - if nobody clicks on your shitty ad, Google makes less. Then there's the added little bit around optimizing for secondary objectives like user engagement so that you don't kill the golden goose by running shocking/negative but highly clicked ads. I actually don't think the system is "incomprehensibly complicated," but it is opaque.
- dillondoyle 5y ago
  Yup that's my take. I think this is pretty one sided, but good look explaining what we're talking about to a jury or even some DA somewhere. I have never worked at google or done anything close to the scale or complexity of building galactic sized RTB networks, but from their papers and the couple people I've talked to they put insanely impressive work into the beast. I'm sure there are all kinds of auction dynamics that I can't even imagine just because of their scale.