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

Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

theinformation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 343 posts

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#251

Post by dorgo »

zaphirplane wrote: post #207
faizanbhat wrote: post #151

As someone who worked in ad tech for half a decade, I fail to understand the fuss about cookie based targeting. We're speaking of databases mapping data to random numbers stored in a file that can easily be deleted. The real issue is ad targeting by a handful of large companies that have personally identifiable information. It's not like cookie based targeting is very effective either. It's very difficult to get cook…

Good point, for me it’s linking my cyberspace identity to my physical identity and having that sold on, stolen aggregated. Increasing my security vulnerability to phishing and identity theft

So you would agree if I store a cookie with a (randomly generated) ID in your browser to remember what you liked, what you bought, how you interacted with my website etc.? Also, I can sell this data to third parties and show personalized ads - all without knowing who you are outside of the web..

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#252

Post by AznHisoka »

dev_tty01 wrote: post #191
AznHisoka wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I want to target women who recently bought Chanel perfume? How would I go about doing that unless I do cookie targeting?

Is this a serious question? Just because you want to target something doesn't mean it is ok to do it. Geez, the arrogance. You want to do X, so the rest of us have to give up our privacy? Technical feasibility is not the same thing as ethical, courteous, or just plain being respectful of other people. The whole industry seems to have done some sort of massive mob rationalization of inappropriate behavior. It's not ok…

You are arguing with a straw man.

I actually agree with your point. I was just asking the question because I was genuinely curious whether there was technically a way to do so w/o cookie targeting. I have no interest in doing such targeting. I was interested in whether a HNer had a creative workaround.

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#253

Post by dorgo »

choppaface wrote: post #162
faizanbhat wrote: post #151

As someone who worked in ad tech for half a decade, I fail to understand the fuss about cookie based targeting. We're speaking of databases mapping data to random numbers stored in a file that can easily be deleted. The real issue is ad targeting by a handful of large companies that have personally identifiable information. It's not like cookie based targeting is very effective either. It's very difficult to get cook…

It used to be that Flash-based cookies were pretty solid, but now there’s no more flash... What matters to ad campaigns is lift and not accuracy. What about conversion attribution? Don’t you need cookies for Amazon/etc to figure out what website led you to a purchase? What the article lacks is a breakdown of who the ad buyers are. In particular, there’s probably a big difference between today’s Facebook vs display ad…

> It used to be that Flash-based cookies were pretty solid, but now there’s no more flash...

But there is so much more available today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evercookie

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#254

Post by AznHisoka »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #195
dev_tty01 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a serious question? Just because you want to target something doesn't mean it is ok to do it. Geez, the arrogance. You want to do X, so the rest of us have to give up our privacy? Technical feasibility is not the same thing as ethical, courteous, or just plain being respectful of other people. The whole industry seems to have done some sort of massive mob rationalization of inappropriate behavior. It's not ok…

Couldn't agree more. I hate it when people respond to concerns with "I make money that way, how could I possibly go on otherwise" as if it somehow legitimitized their unscrupulous activity. Their profits are nobody's problem but theirs and there is absolutely nothing wrong with putting them out of business if that's what it takes to stop their abusive surveillance capitalism. If people's use of privacy-focused softwa…

You got too emotional when reading my response.

I was just asking the question because I was genuinely curious whether there was technically a way to do so w/o cookie targeting. I have no interest in doing such targeting. I was interested in whether a HNer had a creative workaround.

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#255

Post by simonh »

dmitrygr wrote: post #86
manigandham wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The demand for highly-targeted users is what drives up prices. Since Safari users all look the same now and can't be highly targeted, they have lost that high-end demand and prices have fallen to generic display rates.

I would disagree. "People who can afford Apple gadgets" is a desirable high-income audience. I wouldn't be surprised if it was broken out as a special category for purchase by FB and GOOG soon.

The point is they are less valuable because you can't track them, so you can't take advantage of their potential value.

Lets say an average Android user is worth 100 value units, and you can get lots of uniquely identifying information about them, say 90% of the ideal amount of info, so their effective value to you is 90 value units each (90% of 100).

Uniquely identifiable Apple users info is potentially much more valuable, say 200 value units. However you can only get a very small amount of actionable information about them because they are so hard to track, due to Apple's security and privacy systems. So maybe you can only get 10% of the information you would ideally like to have about them. That makes their actionable value to you only 20 value units each (10% of 200).

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#256

Post by dorgo »

AznHisoka wrote: post #252
dev_tty01 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a serious question? Just because you want to target something doesn't mean it is ok to do it. Geez, the arrogance. You want to do X, so the rest of us have to give up our privacy? Technical feasibility is not the same thing as ethical, courteous, or just plain being respectful of other people. The whole industry seems to have done some sort of massive mob rationalization of inappropriate behavior. It's not ok…

You are arguing with a straw man. I actually agree with your point. I was just asking the question because I was genuinely curious whether there was technically a way to do so w/o cookie targeting. I have no interest in doing such targeting. I was interested in whether a HNer had a creative workaround.

> I was interested in whether a HNer had a creative workaround

There is still fingerprinting. If you take that away also then it gets trickier and fuzzier. But hey, if I can recognize you by the way how you walk then it should be even easier to do so by the way how you move the cursor or how you scroll. Or the time you usually visit my website. IP-address? Ping-times, animation delays.. And if somebody pays me good money I will find even more opportunities :-P

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#257

Post by acdha »

panpanna wrote: post #231
snowwrestler wrote: post #150

> Only about 9% of Safari users on an iPhone allow outside companies to track where they go on the web > In comparison, 79% of people who use Google’s Chrome browser allow advertisers to track their browsing habits on mobile devices through cookies. Something to keep in mind the next time you see someone from Google complaining about how Apple won’t allow Google Chrome to run natively on the iPhone.

I hate tracking like everyone else but what you wrote is just pure FUD. Apple forces Firefox/chrome to use their crippled engine but that has nothing to do with the parts that do the tracking. For the record, Firefox has built-in anti tracker which is enabled by default and they do that on all platforms. And don't forgot the privacy enhancements Samsung added to their browser years ago.

Using “FUD” in one sentence and calling WebKit “crippled” in the next is not a good way to establish yourself as a rational analyst. Firefox is my primary browser but I don’t think advocacy like that is helpful.

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#259

Post by simonh »

Joe-Z wrote: post #220
1propionyl wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real goal for the big players using these services isn't actually increasing their own users and revenue. They have better ways to do that. Rather, the goal is to lock everyone else out from even possibly doing so. For example: AdWords isn't about reaching new audiences, it's about staking a claim on an audience in perpetuity (as long as your budget allows). This is completely apparent from the pricing model. Goo…

That's like the 1000th ad-targeting article I've read, but the first time to hear this perspective. Absolutely fascinating, thank you! Here's one question though: If you're the established player in one field and don't really need the online ads other than for staking a claim, would it really influence your sales that much if a competitor takes over that space? Probably just a downturn in number of sales to new custo…

I very much doubt the small bump in sales of Coke after a major ad campaign actually pays for the campaign. That's not the point.

Lets suppose CocaCola stopped advertising completely. No TV adds, no product placement, no billboards, nothing, but Pepsi and the other soft drinks companies kept up their rate of advertising or even increased it to fill the gap. The only time anyone ever saw the name Coke would be when they saw it on a shelf. It might take a while, but the outcome would be inevitable.

Re: Apple’s Ad-Targeting Crackdown Shakes Up Ad Market

#260

Post by guareber »

faizanbhat wrote: post #151

As someone who worked in ad tech for half a decade, I fail to understand the fuss about cookie based targeting. We're speaking of databases mapping data to random numbers stored in a file that can easily be deleted. The real issue is ad targeting by a handful of large companies that have personally identifiable information. It's not like cookie based targeting is very effective either. It's very difficult to get cook…

Another 5 year adtech worker here (and I'm still in it): it doesn't matter that it's a handful of large companies that have PII, it's that those companies keep getting more and more of adbudgets, and continue to build more and more products towards continuing to build real profiles.

Third party cookies should've never existed.

Post reply on HN