3 ms·

They are, and have been for years. Cable TV programming, by which I mean deciding what is broadcast on what channel when, has long (decades) been a question of

They are, and have been for years. Cable TV programming, by which I mean deciding what is broadcast on what channel when, has long (decades) been a question of identifying the audience for the ads coming in, working out what they want to see, showing it, and billing the advertiser. You may even create whole new channels for this target group. Most consumers get it backwards thinking ads exist to fund channels - channels only exist to show you ads. Even back in around 2000 in the UK satellite market (which relied on modems in STBs phoning home as the backchannel) the granularity and segmentation of the data backing this was amazing. Unsurprisingly the people I knew in that universe went on to build the current web ad universe.

Dylan16807 3y ago
> identifying the audience for the ads coming in, working out what they want to see, showing it, and billing the advertiser. You may even create whole new channels for this target group. That's broad targeting. Miles away from hypertargeting/surveillance. > back in around 2000 in the UK satellite market (which relied on modems in STBs phoning home as the backchannel) That is a problem, but is also not cable TV. Are cable modems phoning home?
- fidotron 3y ago
  Next up you will be confused that store loyalty cards have been marketing analytics the whole time.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    Do you really need to be an ass instead of just saying yes or no with some proof? For most of the existence of cable, there was no way for it to send a signal back. It is not fundamentally based on tracking. The targeting you described in detail is not tracking.
    - fidotron 3y ago
      I mean you simply went off showing you don’t know what you are talking about, then ask a stupidly basic question and when it gets the snarky answer it warranted claim the other person is an ass?
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        My bigger point was that cable didn't have that for most of that time, and you're ignoring that to nitpick one line. The answer to that question doesn't affect the rest of my comment. It doesn't show I don't know what I'm talking about, you're just being rude. Especially since the correct answer is probably "some of them". I was hoping you could be more specific, since you're doing your best to give an impression of knowledge but not doing much to share it. And your store loyalty remark was objectively being an ass, that comment adds no value to the conversation at all.
        fidotron 3y ago
        Why would I make the store loyalty remark? Because it is clear you are underestimating things you don’t know. Why would I think that? Because the cable people were targeting individuals and had the mechanisms and data to back it up. The satellite comment shows that _even_ the satellite people were doing this in spite of their disadvantages. There is a distinct tendency on forums like this to believe if something isn’t widely discussed on the internet then it didn’t happen. You should stop assuming the worst and being so obnoxious.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        > You should stop assuming the worst and being so obnoxious. You don't think this applies to the store loyalty comment? I'm not surprised, I wanted specifics instead of implications, jesus. I'm not saying anything "didn't happen", unless you're claiming cable had universal tracking from the start, in the 50s. And AGAIN That doesn't affect my main point, which you keep ignoring. You ignoring my main argument is far more obnoxious than anything I'm doing.

Dylan16807 3y ago

> identifying the audience for the ads coming in, working out what they want to see, showing it, and billing the advertiser. You may even create whole new channels for this target group. That's broad targeting. Miles away from hypertargeting/surveillance. > back in around 2000 in the UK satellite market (which relied on modems in STBs phoning home as the backchannel) That is a problem, but is also not cable TV. Are cable modems phoning home?

fidotron 3y ago
Next up you will be confused that store loyalty cards have been marketing analytics the whole time.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  Do you really need to be an ass instead of just saying yes or no with some proof? For most of the existence of cable, there was no way for it to send a signal back. It is not fundamentally based on tracking. The targeting you described in detail is not tracking.
  - fidotron 3y ago
    I mean you simply went off showing you don’t know what you are talking about, then ask a stupidly basic question and when it gets the snarky answer it warranted claim the other person is an ass?
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      My bigger point was that cable didn't have that for most of that time, and you're ignoring that to nitpick one line. The answer to that question doesn't affect the rest of my comment. It doesn't show I don't know what I'm talking about, you're just being rude. Especially since the correct answer is probably "some of them". I was hoping you could be more specific, since you're doing your best to give an impression of knowledge but not doing much to share it. And your store loyalty remark was objectively being an ass, that comment adds no value to the conversation at all.
      - fidotron 3y ago
        Why would I make the store loyalty remark? Because it is clear you are underestimating things you don’t know. Why would I think that? Because the cable people were targeting individuals and had the mechanisms and data to back it up. The satellite comment shows that _even_ the satellite people were doing this in spite of their disadvantages. There is a distinct tendency on forums like this to believe if something isn’t widely discussed on the internet then it didn’t happen. You should stop assuming the worst and being so obnoxious.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        > You should stop assuming the worst and being so obnoxious. You don't think this applies to the store loyalty comment? I'm not surprised, I wanted specifics instead of implications, jesus. I'm not saying anything "didn't happen", unless you're claiming cable had universal tracking from the start, in the 50s. And AGAIN That doesn't affect my main point, which you keep ignoring. You ignoring my main argument is far more obnoxious than anything I'm doing.