3 ms·

Why? If company X tracks all the websites you visit, it's really not that hard for the government to get a hold of that data. It doesn't matter who collects the

by pyrocat 12y ago

Why? If company X tracks all the websites you visit, it's really not that hard for the government to get a hold of that data. It doesn't matter who collects the data or what it is initially used for; as long as the data is collected you're at risk.

Karunamon 12y ago
So we must hamstring all advertising and personalizing because somewhere a government might abuse their power and get into the data. That's absurd. Why should we change our behavior because bad actors exist instead of dealing with the bad actors? The whole argument implies that somehow blocking ads will keep $someScaryTLA from screwing with you, which is silly on its face. And on top of that, ad tracking data is all about aggregates. Ads are targeted to "groups of people who like X", not "pyrocat, 123 foobar st, san francisco". I really don't get this fear. I'd rather see ads for things that are relevant to me.
- denom 12y ago
  I thought the whole point of the various social graph implementations was to build a datastructure that handles details on the level of an individual: who your friends are, what you shop for etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_graph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_graph E.g. I was browsing cutlery on Crate and Barrel, suddenly I'm seeing ads all over the internet for products that I was viewing. I visited Digital Ocean's site and I see ads everywhere offering their hosting. Same with New Relic. If I had to guess, the economic systems that underpin these ad networks are getting stronger and eventually they will all merge. Well, of course there will still be big players like facebook, but you get my point.
- pyrocat 12y ago
  I'd rather not see ads that are targeted to me. The more an advertiser knows about you, the easier it is for them to manipulate you into buying their product.

3 ms·

Why? If company X tracks all the websites you visit, it's really not that hard for the government to get a hold of that data. It doesn't matter who collects the

by pyrocat 12y ago

Karunamon 12y ago
So we must hamstring all advertising and personalizing because somewhere a government might abuse their power and get into the data. That's absurd. Why should we change our behavior because bad actors exist instead of dealing with the bad actors? The whole argument implies that somehow blocking ads will keep $someScaryTLA from screwing with you, which is silly on its face. And on top of that, ad tracking data is all about aggregates. Ads are targeted to "groups of people who like X", not "pyrocat, 123 foobar st, san francisco". I really don't get this fear. I'd rather see ads for things that are relevant to me.
- denom 12y ago
  I thought the whole point of the various social graph implementations was to build a datastructure that handles details on the level of an individual: who your friends are, what you shop for etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_graph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_graph E.g. I was browsing cutlery on Crate and Barrel, suddenly I'm seeing ads all over the internet for products that I was viewing. I visited Digital Ocean's site and I see ads everywhere offering their hosting. Same with New Relic. If I had to guess, the economic systems that underpin these ad networks are getting stronger and eventually they will all merge. Well, of course there will still be big players like facebook, but you get my point.
- pyrocat 12y ago
  I'd rather not see ads that are targeted to me. The more an advertiser knows about you, the easier it is for them to manipulate you into buying their product.