4 ms·

I don't get it, why is obfuscating consumer data a good thing? If I have to see ads, I'd much rather they be relevant things like hosting providers than random

by hmind 13y ago

I don't get it, why is obfuscating consumer data a good thing? If I have to see ads, I'd much rather they be relevant things like hosting providers than random things I don't care about...

gbrindisi 13y ago
the point is that you dont want to see ads, you are forced to
- raheemm 13y ago
  and that privacy data is used to tailor ad serving.
- nemothekid 13y ago
  If I don't want to see ads, then I don't use the service.
  - gbrindisi 13y ago
    In my part of the internet ads are everywhere, not just on the services I choose to use
    - qq66 13y ago
      I don't get how you can see ads on a website without visiting that website.
freshhawk 13y ago
Firstly the term "relevant ads" is good marketing. They are really "ads targeted to extract maximal revenue from this user". Well targeted ads are basically useless to the consumer since if you actually need something then you know this and you can search for it. The market operating in ad networks optimizes ads that sell enough to pay for more ads while remaining profitable, there is no mechanic that bubbles the best/least expensive offer to consumers since they are not the customer. To enable all this targeting you need to implement surveillance on your targets as widely as possible. So nearly all my internet is surveilled, by many parties, in order to spam the web with offers that are marked up enough to pay for winning ad auctions on popular terms for things I don't need, and could easily find if I did. I get not caring about this. I don't get how anyone who understands how it works would not understanding the popular interest in subverting this mess.
- lsc 13y ago
  >Well targeted ads are basically useless to the consumer since if you actually need something then you know this and you can search for it. The market operating in ad networks optimizes ads that sell enough to pay for more ads while remaining profitable, there is no mechanic that bubbles the best/least expensive offer to consumers since they are not the customer. ... >I get not caring about this. I don't get how anyone who understands how it works would not understanding the popular interest in subverting this mess. Well said. From the consumers point of view? this makes a lot of sense. An ad should convey no credibility. What I find interesting here is that even as the customer, most of the data passed down to the small business owner (say, me when I'm buying display ads) is massaged by folks who are way smarter than I am, and who have an interest in taking credit for as much of my profitability as possible. I mean, it's possible that they have a better view than I do of what causes people to choose me... really, it's kinda likely. but they have no interest in sharing that data with me, and I lack the ability to understand that data even if they did want to share it with me. I think the upshot is that most 'targeted ads' are not nearly as effective as the buyers of said ads are lead to believe. Sure, I can buy ads that bring up my company when a user searches for "VPS" or "Linux VPS" or what have you, but I don't think people are going to buy from me unless they've actually heard about me from a credible source. I mean, Personally? when I buy advertising, one of my first questions is "Do I want to be associated with the content on the page" - I think of it more as 'sponsorship' - you know, when a beer company sponsors a baseball team. I think a lot of the value I get out of advertising is that association with the community, and the more intermediaries you have between me and the community generating the content, the less value I see in the transaction. Really, Eivind Uggedal[1] probably deserves 80% of every advertising dollar I've spent in the last four years. [1]http://uggedal.com/journal/vps-comparison-between-slicehost-and-prgmr/ http://uggedal.com/journal/vps-comparison-between-slicehost-... (yes, yes, I know he did one later where linode kicked my ass, (I argue that was because linode gives you more vcpus, optimizing for best case, while I give you fewer, optimizing for worst-case, but as far as I can tell, they have some I/O monitoring sauce I don't, that really is better) but still, things like that are what I think is primarily responsible for people going through with a purchase... that and word of mouth. Paying google because they gave me the 'last click' is kinda silly.)
- 13y ago
straight_talk 13y ago
Because we live in the information age, when information is the ultimate power. Those ad networks can get to know you as well as the NSA ...
6d0debc071 13y ago
It's a high area of local utility attack via the social layer. In other words, only showing me the things I care about already limits my aspirations and serves to further separate me from the rest of humanity. Indeed, if you have a good enough read on me, you can tell whether I'll be vulnerable to having one specific thing advertised to me excessively that's going to exclude other longer term higher value to £ ratio payoffs. The most obvious examples of this sort of behaviour are people who spend all their time in front of the TV rather than developing deeper interests, or people who are vulnerable to drugs, but you can hook people on almost anything provided you make it look desirable and people don't have much contradicting data. So, if my algorithm decides that the people behind your IP address have no interest in formal education, and so doesn't market anything to do with learning to you, is that really good for you? Is it really good for your daughter or son? It's like being search bubbled, only from the push end of things rather than the pull end. Edit: Freshhawk's phrasing of it as extracting maximum value from the user is a good way of putting it, I think. Getting the most for the least doesn't necessarily work out in your favour unless you have a very good degree of self control and foresight.
- freshhawk 13y ago
  "It's like being search bubbled, only from the push end of things rather than the pull end." That is a good way of putting it. I also like that you identified "you can tell whether I'll be vulnerable to having one specific thing advertised to me excessively". I got into that in a follow up comment because that's really what targeted ads are about, finding people's irrational purchase triggers because "hey, i'm well informed and this product is great value!" is an expensive trigger to target.

by hmind 13y ago

I don't get it, why is obfuscating consumer data a good thing? If I have to see ads, I'd much rather they be relevant things like hosting providers than random things I don't care about...

gbrindisi 13y ago

the point is that you dont want to see ads, you are forced to

raheemm 13y ago
and that privacy data is used to tailor ad serving.
nemothekid 13y ago
If I don't want to see ads, then I don't use the service.
- gbrindisi 13y ago
  In my part of the internet ads are everywhere, not just on the services I choose to use
  - qq66 13y ago
    I don't get how you can see ads on a website without visiting that website.

freshhawk 13y ago

Firstly the term "relevant ads" is good marketing. They are really "ads targeted to extract maximal revenue from this user". Well targeted ads are basically useless to the consumer since if you actually need something then you know this and you can search for it. The market operating in ad networks optimizes ads that sell enough to pay for more ads while remaining profitable, there is no mechanic that bubbles the best/least expensive offer to consumers since they are not the customer. To enable all this targeting you need to implement surveillance on your targets as widely as possible. So nearly all my internet is surveilled, by many parties, in order to spam the web with offers that are marked up enough to pay for winning ad auctions on popular terms for things I don't need, and could easily find if I did. I get not caring about this. I don't get how anyone who understands how it works would not understanding the popular interest in subverting this mess.

lsc 13y ago
>Well targeted ads are basically useless to the consumer since if you actually need something then you know this and you can search for it. The market operating in ad networks optimizes ads that sell enough to pay for more ads while remaining profitable, there is no mechanic that bubbles the best/least expensive offer to consumers since they are not the customer. ... >I get not caring about this. I don't get how anyone who understands how it works would not understanding the popular interest in subverting this mess. Well said. From the consumers point of view? this makes a lot of sense. An ad should convey no credibility. What I find interesting here is that even as the customer, most of the data passed down to the small business owner (say, me when I'm buying display ads) is massaged by folks who are way smarter than I am, and who have an interest in taking credit for as much of my profitability as possible. I mean, it's possible that they have a better view than I do of what causes people to choose me... really, it's kinda likely. but they have no interest in sharing that data with me, and I lack the ability to understand that data even if they did want to share it with me. I think the upshot is that most 'targeted ads' are not nearly as effective as the buyers of said ads are lead to believe. Sure, I can buy ads that bring up my company when a user searches for "VPS" or "Linux VPS" or what have you, but I don't think people are going to buy from me unless they've actually heard about me from a credible source. I mean, Personally? when I buy advertising, one of my first questions is "Do I want to be associated with the content on the page" - I think of it more as 'sponsorship' - you know, when a beer company sponsors a baseball team. I think a lot of the value I get out of advertising is that association with the community, and the more intermediaries you have between me and the community generating the content, the less value I see in the transaction. Really, Eivind Uggedal[1] probably deserves 80% of every advertising dollar I've spent in the last four years. [1]http://uggedal.com/journal/vps-comparison-between-slicehost-and-prgmr/ http://uggedal.com/journal/vps-comparison-between-slicehost-... (yes, yes, I know he did one later where linode kicked my ass, (I argue that was because linode gives you more vcpus, optimizing for best case, while I give you fewer, optimizing for worst-case, but as far as I can tell, they have some I/O monitoring sauce I don't, that really is better) but still, things like that are what I think is primarily responsible for people going through with a purchase... that and word of mouth. Paying google because they gave me the 'last click' is kinda silly.)
13y ago

straight_talk 13y ago

Because we live in the information age, when information is the ultimate power. Those ad networks can get to know you as well as the NSA ...

6d0debc071 13y ago

It's a high area of local utility attack via the social layer. In other words, only showing me the things I care about already limits my aspirations and serves to further separate me from the rest of humanity. Indeed, if you have a good enough read on me, you can tell whether I'll be vulnerable to having one specific thing advertised to me excessively that's going to exclude other longer term higher value to £ ratio payoffs. The most obvious examples of this sort of behaviour are people who spend all their time in front of the TV rather than developing deeper interests, or people who are vulnerable to drugs, but you can hook people on almost anything provided you make it look desirable and people don't have much contradicting data. So, if my algorithm decides that the people behind your IP address have no interest in formal education, and so doesn't market anything to do with learning to you, is that really good for you? Is it really good for your daughter or son? It's like being search bubbled, only from the push end of things rather than the pull end. Edit: Freshhawk's phrasing of it as extracting maximum value from the user is a good way of putting it, I think. Getting the most for the least doesn't necessarily work out in your favour unless you have a very good degree of self control and foresight.

freshhawk 13y ago
"It's like being search bubbled, only from the push end of things rather than the pull end." That is a good way of putting it. I also like that you identified "you can tell whether I'll be vulnerable to having one specific thing advertised to me excessively". I got into that in a follow up comment because that's really what targeted ads are about, finding people's irrational purchase triggers because "hey, i'm well informed and this product is great value!" is an expensive trigger to target.