Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 137 posts

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#121

Post by xtiansimon »

erikb wrote: post #61

"perfectly targeted ads"? Never had that experience. Even if I summarize all the analytics solutions out there, like ads, Facebook stream, Youtube, Amazon, Netflix. What they usually do is they figure out what I did in recent history or in general and present me more of that. I don't know about other people, but that's absolutely not what I want. That's boring, or maybe even unnecessary. Like, if I just bought a book…

I think a "oh that's getting boring, here is other awesome stuff that may surprise you" suggestion engine would get on my nerves (psychological) or just make me pee my pants (physiological).

The Holy Grail is Just In Time or Contextual purchases. The opportunity to buy something when your need is greatest. Calendar app which advertises to you based on your activities. Or the Amazon Dash.

The problem is pretty much all advertising is corruptible and becomes evil. I press your Dash button when you aren't looking.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#122

Post by School-Cotton »

astazangasta wrote: post #111

I don't understand how people can build such a system. Yes, you. I don't understand how people in the thread are debating the merits of advertisement, as if that is what matters here. 1984 is here, and we all love Big Brother. I mean this 100%: if you are participating in ad tech, collecting data on grandmothers in large databases, quit your job now. You are doing harm.

You just repeated your conclusion over and over without giving any non-emotional evidence that it's actually harmful.

I work for a company that makes a lot of money selling targeted ads. If I thought it was harming people, I wouldn't work there. But you haven't convinced me of that.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#123

Post by witty_username »

beefield wrote: post #20
zappo2938 wrote: post #5

When people purchase GQ or Vogue, they are buying it as much for advertisements as for editorial content. When someone flips through one of those magazines, it's like they appreciate the designers hiring models, taking pictures, and sharing it in the magazine even though both they and the reader paid. Take the ads out of GQ or Vogue and there is almost nothing there. If I create an ad on Facebook and people click on…

> This is good. I don't understand why people hate on it so much. I think following quote by Banksy/Sean Tejaratchi[1] explains why there are so strong feelings about advertizing. Of course, not _all_ advertizing is bad, as your example shows. Only the vast majority... "People are taking the piss out of you every day. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall bu…

> You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

Completely wrong. Advertisers have to follow the law and that includes these laws. For example, if an advertisers uses your photo without your permission, you can sue them for copyright infringement.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#124

Post by astazangasta »

School-Cotton wrote: post #122
astazangasta wrote: post #111

I don't understand how people can build such a system. Yes, you. I don't understand how people in the thread are debating the merits of advertisement, as if that is what matters here. 1984 is here, and we all love Big Brother. I mean this 100%: if you are participating in ad tech, collecting data on grandmothers in large databases, quit your job now. You are doing harm.

You just repeated your conclusion over and over without giving any non-emotional evidence that it's actually harmful. I work for a company that makes a lot of money selling targeted ads. If I thought it was harming people, I wouldn't work there. But you haven't convinced me of that.

I'm not sure I intended to convince you, as opposed to merely expressing my emotional response, via this short Internet comment, and I'm not sure I can. I'm merely vocalizing my antipathy to a phenomenon I see around me every day, and that I feel is causing active harm, but that frequently passes without examination or moral outrage. I want you to know that I exist, that my position exists, first, since you should at least acknowledge that I am here in your own mind before you will consider my argument.

But in brief: while you are making a lot of money selling targeted ads by enabling an apparatus that collates detailed information about the lives of everyone on the planet, where they live, how they live, who they speak to, other people are creating machines and systems of murder that increase the power to kill and persecute based on this kind of surveillance.

The 20th century was replete with histories of people who used systems of surveillance to terrorize, persecute and kill hundreds of millions of people. The technology you are building is not only likely to be, but IS being used to this purpose today.

I implore you to stop. What you're building is a system of power and control. It is immensely dangerous. I don't imagine I will convince you through this, or any comment I can make here, but maybe I can provoke a kernel of doubt.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#125

Post by wdr1 »

nsxwolf wrote: post #54

I like when they show me ads for the expensive thing I already bought, as if I'm going to buy it again. Had they predicted I wanted to buy that thing, and shown me ads for things like it first, that might have been useful.

It's poorly done retargeting, but a common mistake.

Advertisers create a cookie list based on people who visited a particular product page. They fail to subtract from that the users who visited the checkout page.

If you're paying on a CPC, the cost to you (the advertiser) is negligible. Most people who have already purchased aren't going to click your ad again.

If you're paying on a CPM or CPV basis, then you're liking wasting money. It probably gets lost in the noise of the waste in all advertising. I have no idea if it's negligible or not, but it would help the user experience if the larger players helped more.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#127

Post by kaybe »

sib wrote: post #120
kaybe wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany has a law which allows you to adblock your mailbox. If you put a sticker on sayin 'no advertisements', you can sue any company that puts material without your name on it in.

Curious: How would companies that mail things to you know that there is a sticker on your (physical) mailbox? Or do you mean that random companies are allowed to put things into your mailbox? In the US, only the US Postal Service is allowed to put things into your mailbox - not even FedEx or UPS are allowed to use it.

There are companies using the postal service to send advertisements such as catalogs to all households in an area. If the mail does not have your name on it (no name, or something like 'to the residents of your address') they can't put it in.

That holds for other random companies too. It's allowed in general to put paper in mailboxes I think, especially local businesses such as take-out food places do it occasionally.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#128

Post by beefield »

witty_username wrote: post #123
beefield wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is good. I don't understand why people hate on it so much. I think following quote by Banksy/Sean Tejaratchi[1] explains why there are so strong feelings about advertizing. Of course, not _all_ advertizing is bad, as your example shows. Only the vast majority... "People are taking the piss out of you every day. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall bu…

> You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Completely wrong. Advertisers have to follow the law and that includes these laws. For example, if an advertisers uses your photo without your permission, you can sue them for copyright infringement.

Of course. Maybe it is good to note that the quote is from a graffiti artist around ten years ago. From his point of view advertisers are allowed almost anything compared to what he is allowed, which is pretty much nothing.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#129

Post by kobayashi »

o_____________o wrote: post #56
cricalix wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happens all across the 'net though, not just on Facebook. Happens to me with Amazon all the time - they have records of me eyeing something up, I buy it a day later, and 2 days later they're still pestering me around the 'net with ads about that thing.

This is intentional. They're shaping your perception of the purchase by mitigating remorse.

I, like novaleaf, would like some sources for your otherwise plausible sounding claim.

Re: Data points that Facebook uses to target ads

#130

Post by [deleted] »

neotek wrote: post #114
fdgdasfadsf wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you would claim that these companies do not hold these lists? Or do you understand that they currently don't sell them (because it is currently more profitable to sell services based on them)? Do you remember what happened when Radioshack went under recently?

>So you would claim that these companies do not hold these lists? Why put words in my mouth, particularly when those words have nothing to do with what I actually wrote? To address the meat of your conspiracy theory, Facebook and Google and indeed the vast majority of companies in similar positions with similar data collection activities all have very specific, highly defined privacy statements which explicitly rule…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN