3 ms·

I agree. But in the crappy experience topic, it seems to me that this is just bad engineering. If I were to build an algo to show personalized ads, I would defi

I agree. But in the crappy experience topic, it seems to me that this is just bad engineering. If I were to build an algo to show personalized ads, I would definitely account for the likelihood of someone wanting to buy 2 consecutive cars vs a car and maybe some car related products. How was that decision made, because it seems that an entire industry adopted this and called it a day.

piva00 1y ago
There's no incentive for the ad platforms to account for that, real-time bidding will make money for them no matter the experience of the ad being showed. If you get another ad for a product you already bought the advertiser already paid for placement, a click through is just a bonus on top of that. Even more when information is so secretly guarded that any analysis of the impact of an ad is extremely flawed, it hasn't solved the old adage from John Wanamaker: > Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half It's meant to be that way, the ad platforms do not want advertisers to know what is waste and optimise their ads further than what's needed to keep them advertising, they just need to throw some bones here and there, convert a few people through clicks, to make themselves look indispensable. There's no incentive to improve that, at all.
jqpabc123 1y ago
How was that decision made, because it seems that an entire industry adopted this and called it a day. Easy --- advertisers pay for bad ads the same as good ones --- why bother stopping the bad ones? Convincing so many advertisers to just blindly trust the system and buy into the concept of black box "personalized" advertising is actually the real marketing coup here. According to some stats, global use of ad blockers is now over 40%. Once it exceeds 50%, I believe this stupidity will slowly start to die out.

piva00 1y ago

There's no incentive for the ad platforms to account for that, real-time bidding will make money for them no matter the experience of the ad being showed. If you get another ad for a product you already bought the advertiser already paid for placement, a click through is just a bonus on top of that. Even more when information is so secretly guarded that any analysis of the impact of an ad is extremely flawed, it hasn't solved the old adage from John Wanamaker: > Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half It's meant to be that way, the ad platforms do not want advertisers to know what is waste and optimise their ads further than what's needed to keep them advertising, they just need to throw some bones here and there, convert a few people through clicks, to make themselves look indispensable. There's no incentive to improve that, at all.

jqpabc123 1y ago

How was that decision made, because it seems that an entire industry adopted this and called it a day. Easy --- advertisers pay for bad ads the same as good ones --- why bother stopping the bad ones? Convincing so many advertisers to just blindly trust the system and buy into the concept of black box "personalized" advertising is actually the real marketing coup here. According to some stats, global use of ad blockers is now over 40%. Once it exceeds 50%, I believe this stupidity will slowly start to die out.