4 ms·
Surely there's room enough for both? People who want to be anonymous, and those who want to be verifiable? Why does anonymity need to be 'prevented'?
by arbitrage 12y ago
Surely there's room enough for both? People who want to be anonymous, and those who want to be verifiable? Why does anonymity need to be 'prevented'?
- JetSpiegel 12y agoHow can you target ads if people are anonymous?
- scintill76 12y agoYou seem to take targeting ads as an essential operation that everyone will agree is essential.
- JetSpiegel 12y agoPoe's Law strikes again. It's not my point of view, but it sure is for the incumbents.
- reitanqild 12y agoAs long as you can tell them apart you can target ads. You don't need to know the names, exact addresses, email etc.
- DonHopkins 12y agoInstead of targeting ads, just develop products that everyone wants. Problem solved!
- dredmorbius 12y agoLocation + search terms are vastly more useful than any comprehensive history. The comprehensive history, by contrast, is really starting to creep people out. Source: G+ discussion with a Google engineer. https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/HFT1emeFpwU https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/HFT1emeF... The claim that Google requires intrusive personal dossiers for revenue generation is a myth. Google doesn't even use detailed personal dossiers in search ads, which we all know generates the vast majority of Google's revenue. It's really hard to do much better in search advertising than current query + location. Yes, we do a bit more than that, and will probably do more personalization going forward, but more personalization rarely yields more revenue. Instead, it usually improves our metrics associated with user satisfaction, although again the effects are probably far smaller than you would think.