GDPR will pop the adtech bubble • Hacker News Board

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#221

Post by TeMPOraL » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:38 PM UTC

FooBarWidget wrote: post #73

wpietri wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is certainly fine with me. I'm always amused that the notion that I will regret not having "relevant" ads. Where "relevant" means more likely to get me to buy things I was not intending to buy. Ads make sense to me in the age of information scarcity. But now if I need a thing, searching always turns up what I want. If I need to figure out what kind of thing to buy, I can read review at places like The Wirecutte…

Isn't what you're saying in your first paragraph just strawmanning the definition of "relevant"? If you do not want to buy anything no matter what they show you then those ads are by definition not relevant. If they make you want to buy then the ads are by definition relevant. They aren't brainwashing you, at the end of the day the one in control of the credit card is still you.

> They aren't brainwashing you, at the end of the day the one in control of the credit card is still you.

Right, because we're all perfectly rational robots with full control of all of our emotions and impulses, and the advertisers totally don't employ cutting-edge research in psychology to manipulate us.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#222

Post by adventured » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:42 PM UTC

fanf2 wrote: post #211

> perhaps a $trillion or more has been spent on adtech, and not one brand known to the world has been made by it Google.

You can add Alibaba, Baidu and Toutiao to that list. Nearly all of their revenue comes from adtech. Just three platforms used by a billion people. Yahoo was also made possible by adtech, it was / is a brand known to over a billion people.

Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat - they only exist courtesy of their adtech.

Can you imagine how difficult it would be for Twitter to sustain itself with a paid model? There's such an extreme imbalance between the people that post regularly and are power users, vs people that just occasionally consume. The median user that reads a few tweets per day - at best - is never going to pay $60 or $100 per year for that product. Even if you have five million power users on there paying $100 per year, Twitter instantly goes bankrupt, they could never charge enough.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#223

Post by nine_k » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:43 PM UTC

madeofpalk wrote: post #112

rossdavidh wrote: post #59

Oddly, I think the article underestimates the size of the change coming. I think one side affect of the surge of IT into advertising, is that it has become easier to measure exactly how well advertising works. By and large, it doesn't, very well. I am reminded of this, from Paul Graham, about his time at Yahoo: http://www.paulgraham.com/yahoo.html "...The reason Yahoo didn't care about a technique that extracted the…

> By and large, it doesn't, very well. I know Twitter isn't known for being the best at advertising, but it was made exceptionally clear to me that online advertising is a massive bunch of lies when I did my GDPR Twitter data export and it included me in a bunch of incorrect, non-sensical and contradictory ad targeting groups. Twitter claims I: * Own a cat, dog and other animal (I don't) * Have between $100k- $999k l…

Have they got the following mostly right:

    * Your age bracket;
    * The fact that your net worth is positive (not deep in debt);
    * Whether you live in a city / suburb / countryside;
    * Which part of country is that;
    * Your gender;
    * Your race / ethnicity, broadly?

If so, they still have an immensely precise focus on you, compared to TV, radio, or paper media, even if they're mistaken about your cat.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#224

Post by marcosdumay » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:45 PM UTC

wdr1 wrote: post #200

madeofpalk wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By and large, it doesn't, very well. I know Twitter isn't known for being the best at advertising, but it was made exceptionally clear to me that online advertising is a massive bunch of lies when I did my GDPR Twitter data export and it included me in a bunch of incorrect, non-sensical and contradictory ad targeting groups. Twitter claims I: * Own a cat, dog and other animal (I don't) * Have between $100k- $999k l…

> GDPR Twitter data export and it included me in a bunch of incorrect, non-sensical and contradictory ad targeting groups. This is expected. It's not desirable, but it is expected. The problem is your comparing it to an absolute. I.e. to perfect. If advertisers had that choice, they would love it. They generally don't. Remarketing is kinda close, but limits the scale. Rather, the only other scalable options are far w…

> Rather, the only other scalable options are far worse.

Is it really worse than "this article is about X, Y is related, let's show some ads for Y"?

I bet from the point of view of the advertisement middlemen it is not. Because they capitalize mostly on showing ads of products that people already decided to buy or are very near deciding. But that is yet another racquet that only decreases the value of the industry. My question is, from the point of view of the real advertisers (the ones selling something), is it really worse?

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#225

Post by zerostar07 » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:46 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #213

quotemstr wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is "my business model depends on it" not a bona fide legitimate purpose for information collection? Nobody is forcing anyone to patronize a business that relies on data collection for profitability. I'm extremely skeptical of regulation that interferes with consensual deals between economic actors. You want transparency? Fine. But you don't get to randomly outlaw certain entire classes of business.

> How is "my business model depends on it" not a bona fide legitimate purpose for information collection? Business models are arbitrary and orthogonal to services provided. > But you don't get to randomly outlaw certain entire classes of business. Why not? Some business models are clearly antisocial and don't deserve to exist. GDPR is only outlawing business models based on large-scale abuse of people's private and i…

> Business models are arbitrary and orthogonal to services provided.

that doesn't change the fact that the business model depends on that orthogonal action. Is it unlawful for gyms to charge by subscription instead of per-use knowing that most people don't use them? Should the NYTimes be forced to go pay-per article instead of subscription? Should nightclubs not be allowed to overcharge the bottle?

> GDPR literally only outlaws being a huge asshole (in context of users' data).

It goes beyond that, by forcing you to serve people that don't agree to your business model.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#226

Post by cbcoutinho » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:49 PM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #165

clatan wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot more stuff to do with ML and make money than ad targeting

Maybe that’s true, but if the ML ad targeting industry disappears, several of those currently employed ML workers have little to no reason to exist.

Yikes! Why the hyperbole? I'm sure if someone is clever enough to learn and be productive with ML, they'll be able to pivot and be productive in another field and/or using other tools.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#227

Post by Paul-ish » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:50 PM UTC

dullgiulio wrote: post #110

Paul-ish wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if Google emotionally bribed people? eg "For every month you have targeted ads enabled, we will donate 10 cents to [INSERT CHARITY]."

They don't have to. The possibility to opt out from tracking have been available for a while, although it was always pretty hidden in the settings. After I opted out, I started seeing awful ads: mostly semi-naked bodies of people claiming to lose weight or bald heads. Of course it's easy for Google to just say that this is what their economically optimized algorythm selects for a perfect stranger, because those are t…

Turning off the display of personalized ads and turning off data collection are different. Do the setting you are talking about prevent data collection?

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#228

Post by adventured » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:50 PM UTC

afarrell wrote: post #161

lovich wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you dont have money, materials, or employees flowing through Europe there is very little they could do to you even if you actively flaunted the law. They could always block access to your site, or even try to sanction your business but unless they are willing to invade your country to physically stop you they don't have very many options. There is always the chance that your own government will enforce EU rulings…

If another company with facilities in the EU then buys the noncompliant company, could they enforce a judgement on the parent company? If a noncompliant company is going through due diligence prior to being acquired, they be legally obligated to disclose that judgement? Even if they didn't, how hard would it be for an associate at a law firm to check public records about the company?

The more likely problem will have to do with a US or Chinese company buying an EU company (given the scale imbalances in question). It'd be critical to maintain the existing GDPR compliance and keep the entities separate if the US or Chinese operations are not GDPR compliant per their domestic businesses.

Alibaba for example likely has no plans to concern itself with GDPR compliance in its domestic Chinese operations. They obviously will segment and comply with GDPR as it pertains to the EU operations / EU customers.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#229

Post by briandear » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:53 PM UTC

downandout wrote: post #207

islanderfun wrote: post #101

Completely oblivious and ignorant here: If a company has no official office in Europe, how does this affect them? All advertisement and business focus is say only in the US, is it business as usual? What if an EU citizen decides to sign up? Are US companies forced to deny customers not par of say an IP block (half assed method I know, but just speaking in general)?

The guidance we have received is that if your business is not located in the EU, not targeting EU countries, you don't have parts of your site translated to languages spoken in EU countries, and do not have an EU-based domain name extension, your EU traffic is considered incidental and GDPR probably does not apply to you. But, as with everything in the GDPR, that is extremely murky. This law is subject to unique inte…

Language is a horrible benchmark.

French in Canada, English and Spanish in the US, German among German expats (of which there are millions.)

Targeting a business for extortion because of the languages offered? Ridiculous. GDPR should only apply to businesses with a physical nexus in Europe, anything else is an attempt to assert extraterritorial jurisdiction.

Europeans don’t have to visit US/Canadian/Chinese websites. If they want to “protect” themselves, they simply stop using services they find objectionable. GDPR is nonsense — individuals should be allowed to do what they feel is right for them.

Why not ban all junk food from Europe? Tobacco? Alcohol? Those harm people far more than targeted advertising. If we actually “cared,” we’d be banning those industries.

GDPR is nothing more than a trade barrier.

Re: GDPR will pop the adtech bubble

#230

Post by zerostar07 » Sun, May 13, 2018, 9:53 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #219

zerostar07 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> personal information cannot be conceived as a mere economic asset I wonder why not? Personal information is useless for most people, they give it away for free to the state institutions and the police wont even ask your consent. Some websites and services have found a way to make money off it, in exchange for free services etc. Why is this an ethically unacceptable proposition?

Because it ends up abused by marketers, and frequently ends up facilitating crime as well. GDPR as a law came out directly from the last decade of mass surveillance economy.

So what? It was part of the agreement when you consented. The same way that when you go to a club, a strip club, or a casino you know you 'll be exploited in a way. Sounds like advocating for overreaching laws that "save you from yourself" and keep you away from harm / drugs etc.

It's a bit ironic that you brought up mass surveillance because GDPR explicitly exempts the police and security services from its reach.

Edit (i can't post a reply): - consent should always be required, but if you don't consent i shouldn't be legally required to service you. GDPR is more than just consent hence the overreach

- The NSA has more data than any single actor on the internet, we can't possibly claim that private surveillance is worse. The NSA may have a better profile of me than any private actor even though (and especially because) i m not american. And their profiling can harm something that businesses generally don't care to harm: my freedom