4 ms·

I’ll be honest that’s too long of a post to read and a cursory reading didn’t really shed any light on your point of view. Many of us are old enough to remembe

I’ll be honest that’s too long of a post to read and a cursory reading didn’t really shed any light on your point of view. Many of us are old enough to remember untargeted ads, and pretty much all anybody saw at the time as an ad for cialis/viagra. 14 year old girls, 25 year old men, it didn’t matter, clearly you’re in the market for ED meds. this is a regression and i’ll take anonymized profile data over seeing completely irrelevant ads. One thing that stood out to me from your post is this > Many people use adblockers, many devices are used by more than one user, etc. adblockers see no where near the adoption you seem to think, as it’s not many users, it’s a very small minority. and most users in fact have their own device and have for some years now. you seem to be detached from reality.

pas 3y ago
> this is a regression and i’ll take anonymized profile data over seeing completely irrelevant ads. exactly. let the user decide. that's why it's out to be opt-in/out. > you seem to be detached from reality. I'm simply stating factors that are not insignificant compared to the difference we are talking about. the policy discussion starts with cost-benefit analysis of "implicit profile-based ads" vs "alternative ads", and I'm simply stating that there are already many factors that ad networks consider. FB/Meta rolled out Advantage+, which is a machine-learning-based full campaign optimization system. (The advertiser uploads many banners, and Meta tries all of them for various target groups, and learns which one to show for which users.) ... and it did all this because of Apple's ATT (app tracking transparency)