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

Why I Work on Ads

jefftk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 882 posts

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#671

Post by _carbyau_ »

imron wrote: post #628
filoleg wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I keep reading on HN, Facebook ad network ads (which includes Instagram) are by far the best and most precise in terms of targeting, it doesn't even get close. And from my anecdotal experiences, I have to agree with both you and what I see on HN in that regard. Not only they get the advertisers right up my alley, they even get the exact products I want to click on. For a specific example: I don't get easily…

> and I have no kids According to their algorithm, you do now.

With the story of Target figuring out daughter was pregnant before the daughters father, it gives rise to all kinds of "Movie plot" plausible sounding scenarios.

Movie plot: Two people meet up, have fun, then go their separate ways. 9 months later she has a kid, dad doesn't know. But FAANG knows...

The problem with "plausible movie plots" is they are often overrated in terms of % chance of happening.

With linked graphs and relationship trees, it doesn't seem impossible "The Algorithm" could figure out you have kids before you do, or at least base it's Advertising results on a % chance guess.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#672

Post by jonplackett »

kingsuper20 wrote: post #61

The online ad business generally mystifies me. While an awful lot of the internet, especially the surveillance advertising part, looks to be the greatest misallocation of engineering (and other) talent in the history of the world, ya gotta ask about the efficacy. The only reasonably accurate targeting I've ever run into is the occasional ad for something I just browsed on Amazon. I've never clicked on an internet ad.…

One of the craziest parts is the total lack of accountability.

Google / FB just say they show your ad to a XXXX million people. You owe them $XXXX.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#673

Post by inopinatus »

adriand wrote: post #647

The author writes that you can either pay with money or you can “pay with your attention”. What’s left unsaid is the cost of that attention. I believe that cost is very high and it isn’t just ads, it’s the design of countless products including social media sites, games and even the site you’re reading this on right now. It’s all designed to extract as much attention as possible, and the cost is people’s ability to c…

The arrogance of appropriation is a pathology common to developers.

For example: “we’re rolling out a new tool. It takes only fifteen minutes to learn!” when 100,000 people have to learn it.

Developers working in advertising aren’t just exhibiting this disorder; they are consumed by it.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#674

Post by notjustanymike »

kingsuper20 wrote: post #61

The online ad business generally mystifies me. While an awful lot of the internet, especially the surveillance advertising part, looks to be the greatest misallocation of engineering (and other) talent in the history of the world, ya gotta ask about the efficacy. The only reasonably accurate targeting I've ever run into is the occasional ad for something I just browsed on Amazon. I've never clicked on an internet ad.…

A "successful" ad has a CTR (click through rate) of over 0.2%. Almost no one is clicking on ads.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#675

Post by johanneskanybal »

It's one of those things people will look back in 10 years at and wonder how we thought that was ok. Driving one of the most important innovations of our time with data driven praying of people's weakest spots. Says something about how many decades behind our financial system is compared to everything else. Haven't clicked on an ad in 20 years but apparently others do, just install an add blocker.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#676

Post by jefftk »

joefkelley wrote: post #538
beloch wrote: post #357

The crux of his justification for what he does is that, he argues, people wouldn't want to pay a monthly fee for services like youtube bundled with complete respect for their privacy. First, users do not currently have that choice. Sure, you can pay for some things (e.g. youtube premium), but it does nothing for your privacy. If you buy youtube premium you'll very likely see more ads for youtube premium (if you're no…

> If you buy youtube premium you'll very likely see more ads for youtube premium Really? I have youtube premium and I can't recall seeing ads for it. Why would they advertise a product to people that already have that product? > Google Ads could have a flag that turns it's data collection/sharing off and replaces it with micropayments to any site that user visits that are running Google Ads. FWIW, this flag already e…

> Hypothetically you could imagine a "stronger" setting that doesn't just do away with personalization, it does away with ads altogether by allowing the user to "outbid" any advertiser.

Google built this, it was called Contributor, and it wasn't very popular.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#677

Post by jefftk »

cute_boi wrote: post #479
coding123 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Targeted advertising is great, so long as it targets "the viewer of pages like this" not "this person recently went to all these other web sites". I think that's what ads should be - exactly like TV.

TV based advertising is also bad tbh. There used to be ads related to fairness cream which is effectively virtue signaling you should use this cream to look white and beautiful. And there are ads related to soft drinks claiming you will be strong etc. Ads sucks and it is alive due to economic incentive from ads. And we know where there is economic incentive its hard to stop (eg. bitcoin mining economic incentive)

I know this isn't your point, but how is fairness cream virtue signaling?

(If you said it was signaling race or wealth or something I would understand, but virtue?)

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#678

Post by posharma »

I'll probably get downvoted for this. Why does OP need to justify his/her job in adtech? He/she loves the job and probably pays well. That's it. Period. Why go about convincing strangers!

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#679

Post by zffr »

andrepd wrote: post #587
rpicard wrote: post #44

Just wanted to mention I appreciate seeing a different perspective here. I know there's a lot of negative reaction to it, and I can empathize with that because there's a long history of negative behavior by the advertising industry. But there's no doubt that there are benefits too, and seeing some nuance on HN is always a win.

I see advertising as intrinsically immoral. So it's not only the privacy abuses (which are the most serious part) but advertising in general.

So its immoral for a math tutor to post a flyer about his services in a local coffee shop?

Advertising is a very wide spectrum and I think its way too heavy handed to say it is all intrinsically immoral. Some is, maybe even most of it, but surely not all is immoral.

I'd argue that advertising in general is a good thing, but that there are a few parts that are bad. One bad part is the vast surveillance and privacy intrusion of modern digital advertising is what is bad. Another are the advertising tactics used to manipulate people into buying things they shouldn't.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#680

Post by ipaddr »

meowface wrote: post #667
katzgrau wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Digital marketing performance is increasingly measurable and there's more data than ever proving that it can be extremely effective. You can certainly waste a lot of money doing it too. Getting the right message in front of the right user at the right time is a lot harder than people think it is. The above is where there's a lot of smoke and mirrors in ad tech. But for advertising as a whole, it's not a massive indus…

>Getting the right message in front of the right user at the right time is a lot harder than people think it is. Guess that's why we need those brightest minds of our generation on the problem, as the saying goes, right? That sentence gives me extreme Matthew McConaughey-in- Wolf of Wall Street vibes. After seeing you wrote that, I immediately assumed you very likely work in advertising. Sure enough... I have no clue…

If the greatest minds of society are going for the easiest payday perhaps they are not really our greatest minds. Perhaps they are the smart ones by cashing in but the great minds with the great ideas they are not.
Post reply on HN