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

Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 632 posts

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#221

Post by kalleboo »

ineedasername wrote: post #132

We'll, so much for the myth of privacy apathy. I've seen it mentioned before that for many people, the younger the more prevalent, the sense was "well the genie is out of the bottle so who cares." Clearly that was either never the case, or things have changed. Or now there is the sense of "well maybe we can shove that genie back where it came from."

If it's as easy as tapping a button, anyone will choose privacy.

If you have to leave your social circle, or try to convert them all to something else, (or in the case of all those noncompliant GDPR warnings, tapping a button, waiting 15 seconds, tapping 4 more buttons) that is too much work and you give up

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#222

Post by dreamcompiler »

Listen to the world's smallest violin .

I have zero sympathy for Facebook, advertisers, and businesses whose models depend on a fundamental privacy flaw in the design of the web. Business worked fine before that flaw existed and it will be fine after it's fixed.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#223

Post by tedajax »

jensensbutton wrote: post #45
danbruc wrote: post #3

That sense of entitlement makes me sick. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we would have to spend way too much on ads. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise my small business can not survive. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not understand who our customers are. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not identify new customers. Tracking users is necessary, otherwise we can not evaluate the e…

There's an argument to be made that "tracking" has had less real world harm to humanity than the push to get rid of it. Real harm will come to people/business through loss of income due to the clamp down on tracking. Not to mention that ads are the foundation of all the content we get for "free" that we've come to rely on.

"Won't someone think of the poor businesses" is not a good argument lol.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#224

Post by sidlls »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #146
sidlls wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m surprised it’s so low. These sites are used mostly for indulging in narcissism, and people who tend that direction generally prefer to have their lives be less private.

They want their lives to be public to the masses that matter to them, not an evil corporation.

Even if they make that distinction I don’t think they care.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#225

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

_zzaw wrote: post #67

If people opt out of what you're doing to them as soon as they're made aware you're doing it, then perhaps that's a sign that you shouldn't have been doing it in the first place. I don't even believe that 25% of users actually wanted tracking. I think a lot of people just blindly tap buttons to make annoyances go away, and these guys just hit the wrong button.

People get to deny tracking and still use Facebook. Of course they like that choice.

Would they be willing to accept the end of Facebook to stop the tracking? No. How do we know that? Because they kept using it in the past.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#226

Post by dboreham »

Engineering-MD wrote: post #126
yawaworht1978 wrote: post #12

Even with all the tracking, the generated ads still suck, showing things already purchased. This reminds me of the overhyped lead generation tools out there, they do not work as expected. Someone's financial interest is the root cause here, someone is making good money with ads. The ones who sell ads? For sure. The ones who buy adds? Not many success stories out there.

The explanation I have heard previously is that people have bought an item are actually more likely to buy another: unhappy with the current purchase, or people who need multiple items. Sure, for most people it’s irrelevant as they are happy with their purchase, but most ads are ignored anyway.

These explanations come from delusional people. The real explanation is that targeting really doesn't exist in any useful form.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#227

Post by rchaud »

als0 wrote: post #161
rascul wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I vaguely recall that Google used to use text ads. Not sure if they still do, or if I recall correctly.

From a Google search I made in the last hour, the top 6 search results were all text ads.

I think the OP meant AdSense (now Google Ads), which is when publishers display ads from Google's advertiser inventory. Those are a combination of text-only or banner ads. Although I mostly see banner ads on the rare occasions I turn off my adblocker.

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#228

Post by [deleted] »

threatofrain wrote: post #211
janpot wrote: post #165

Often I hear the argument, people saying "I prefer ads that are relevant for me over random ads". But the result of the tracking is not only that you get "relevant" ads, it's that your timelines and your feeds and your news gets tweaked in ways that makes you engage with ads as much as possible. Not only do you get manipulated in buying stuff you didn't ask for (ads in general). You're also getting spoonfed content t…

I'm curious how much manipulation people think is involved in terms of buying things you didn't want. Enough to absolve someone of their financial responsibility for buying? Why or why not?

[deleted]

Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking

#229

Post by SakeOfBrevity »

sam_goody wrote: post #90

The article spins it (towards the end) as though this is a bad thing. Ridiculous.

I'd wager that 2/3 of software industry jobs market (number of positions and compensation figures) are built on online advertising industry. Now you tell me what is good or what is bad
Post reply on HN