5 ms·

Ostensibly it's so that the user can get more relevant ads. In practice, it's not of course, but that's the answer you'd get if you ask them.

nerdponx 4y ago
Of course that's the goal. The IAB isn't an NSA front. The problem with advertising is not the primary goal, but all the secondary things that can happen.
- account42 4y ago
  I disagree: The main problem with advertising is with its primary goal, which is manipulting people into excess consumption. There are of course other secondary issues as well, but even without them ads are already a net negative for society.
- lokedhs 4y ago
  If it's the goal, you'd expect ads to be actually be more relevant and useful to users. They don't, which has been shown in studies. What has been shown is that showing the same things people already bought give people regret which increases total amount of purchases. In other word, the goal is to not to give users a good experiences watching ad's. It is to make them buy more, which is an orthogonal goal.
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    Oh, I see what you mean. I guess it depends on whose definition of "relevant" you follow.
- wiseleo 4y ago
  Let’s say you’re DHS. You contact some person and have a conversation like this Govt: “I need IP addresses, ideally cellular and known public wifi, of a person using this email address”. Data broker: “Here’s the list including the most recent cellular IP address associated with that person at this timestamp and their most used public wifi locations.” Govt: “Hey, cellular provider, where is this subscriber right now?” Provider: “Here’s the lat/long, last seen 1 second ago. Happy hunting!”
  - gruez 4y ago
    How does that contradict what the parent poster is saying? Even though ad-tech companies make tracking individuals easier, it doesn't change the fact that it's still largely funded by advertising itself, not through some shady government shell company.
- michaelt 4y ago
  lokedhs said "ostensibly" because the internet advertising industry has long maintained the pretence that tracking users and showing them relevant ads is helpful to the user, when the truth is the advertising industry cares about the opinion of users like the thanksgiving industry cares about the opinion of turkeys - which is to say, not at all. There's a reason these things are opt-out rather than opt-in. The answer to marcus0x62's question - why would a person want advertisers to correlate their behavior - is that they wouldn't, and if they want to advocate for their own self-interest they should install an ad blocker.
  - a4isms 4y ago
    > the truth is the advertising industry cares about the opinion of users like the thanksgiving industry cares about the opinion of turkeys Nobody asks for the steak’s opinion when planning a BBQ.
    - justincredible 4y ago
      [dead]

nerdponx 4y ago

Of course that's the goal. The IAB isn't an NSA front. The problem with advertising is not the primary goal, but all the secondary things that can happen.

account42 4y ago
I disagree: The main problem with advertising is with its primary goal, which is manipulting people into excess consumption. There are of course other secondary issues as well, but even without them ads are already a net negative for society.
lokedhs 4y ago
If it's the goal, you'd expect ads to be actually be more relevant and useful to users. They don't, which has been shown in studies. What has been shown is that showing the same things people already bought give people regret which increases total amount of purchases. In other word, the goal is to not to give users a good experiences watching ad's. It is to make them buy more, which is an orthogonal goal.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Oh, I see what you mean. I guess it depends on whose definition of "relevant" you follow.
wiseleo 4y ago
Let’s say you’re DHS. You contact some person and have a conversation like this Govt: “I need IP addresses, ideally cellular and known public wifi, of a person using this email address”. Data broker: “Here’s the list including the most recent cellular IP address associated with that person at this timestamp and their most used public wifi locations.” Govt: “Hey, cellular provider, where is this subscriber right now?” Provider: “Here’s the lat/long, last seen 1 second ago. Happy hunting!”
- gruez 4y ago
  How does that contradict what the parent poster is saying? Even though ad-tech companies make tracking individuals easier, it doesn't change the fact that it's still largely funded by advertising itself, not through some shady government shell company.
michaelt 4y ago
lokedhs said "ostensibly" because the internet advertising industry has long maintained the pretence that tracking users and showing them relevant ads is helpful to the user, when the truth is the advertising industry cares about the opinion of users like the thanksgiving industry cares about the opinion of turkeys - which is to say, not at all. There's a reason these things are opt-out rather than opt-in. The answer to marcus0x62's question - why would a person want advertisers to correlate their behavior - is that they wouldn't, and if they want to advocate for their own self-interest they should install an ad blocker.
- a4isms 4y ago
  > the truth is the advertising industry cares about the opinion of users like the thanksgiving industry cares about the opinion of turkeys Nobody asks for the steak’s opinion when planning a BBQ.
  - justincredible 4y ago
    [dead]