3 ms·
>I don't care what content you're looking at. I care who are you. Specifically, I care whether you're a person who owns a dog and spends money on high-quality/l
by nobody9999 3y ago
>I don't care what content you're looking at. I care who are you. Specifically, I care whether you're a person who owns a dog and spends money on high-quality/luxury dog goods. Whether you're looking at something related to dogs or a post by someone in your family about a wedding last weekend doesn't matter.
I think you have it backwards. You don't care who someone is. Rather, you care about "people most likely to buy my product," and much, much more about people who actually buy your product. Their name, family history, life story and other information is irrelevant.
Having the money to pay and the will to buy are the only important things.
As such, which was alluded to by others, instead of spying on/tracking people to hazard a guess (perhaps even a good guess, but not necessarily) what they're likely to purchase, let's just ask them up front to list the things they are interested in, with the ability to modify such a list whenever they like.
And make that list opt-in, of course.
Then use the database of those lists to target ads. People see ads for stuff they're interested in, those who aren't interested don't see them. Which is a win-win for consumers and advertisers. Consumers only see relevant ads and advertisers know their ad impressions are among folks who are actually interested.
Sure, there are lots of reasons to argue against a voluntary database like that, not least of which ad-supported sites would suffer.
But if you (like me) don't earn a living via ad-tech, even such a flawed idea seems like paradise compared to the current levels of spying/tracking which would make a Stasi[0] wet dream look decidedly soft-core.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi