26 ms·
Constant tracking isn't necessary for advertising, it's a choice. So is hiding the extent of this tracking from the user. If the user doesn't understand the ful
by close04 3mo ago
Constant tracking isn't necessary for advertising, it's a choice. So is hiding the extent of this tracking from the user. If the user doesn't understand the full scope and impact of the "payment" then the business model is akin to loansharking. Those people also take the deal without realizing it will cost them a finger.
How many fields obscure the form of payment, the amounts, the methods when you purchase a good or service? You're oversimplifying and glossing over the real issues.
If it was as simple as "you must pay" and nothing else mattered, then any form of payment would be justifiable.
- jambalaya8 3mo agoI mean, I don't agree with the tracking, constant or otherwise, but it enables advertisers and other company go-betweens to manage their ad spending. Suggesting an outlay of cash to push platinum card ads on 14 year olds, or diet medications on a forum for people who have a hard time gaining weight, or things anathema to certain people (assuming not done to mess with them) -- just random examples -- is at a minimum a waste of that company's investment. At the same time, if you have ever been in certain neighbourhoods, you personally might feel really grateful for keeping this setting on; a few hours, or days, in some places can send you ads that'll change your ad profile SO much for SO long, it'll drive you crazy if you aren't careful, or at least make you annoyed and regret it. Personally, I prefer variety in my ads, and not to be profiled, but there are times I specifically and expressly choose tracking for ads.