Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be had for free with uBlock Origin ( I never see an ad on YT ).
That works only on desktop.
YouTube Vanced works on Android.
Also, Firefox + Unblock.
Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
421–430 of 632 posts
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#422I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…
I think the answer is small social networks for several hundred and thousand people at a time, running on hosting which can cost 10-20 bucks a month.
Of course, that would mean techies stepping up and doing this for their families and tribes...
Many of us seem to be preoccupied with chasing the advertising dollar which exploits those same people.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#423I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…
A lot of this crowd thinks toll everything is the right solution, since there is a heavy libertarian... presence.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m a photographer, and I right now I’m targeting local teenagers and their moms for high school senior portrait sessions. I would think they’d rather see that, be reminded it’s time to get them done, and possibly learn about a better photographer than seeing an ad for an ice cream maker or what have you.
In other words you want to manipulate them into buying something they wouldn’t have if they hadn’t seen your ad. That doesn’t sound like a good thing for the person on the other side of the transaction.
A common view is that both sides in an economic transaction gain some sort of benefit. Nonetheless sentiments like "all labor is exploitation" are fairly common, so I can see why that view exists, given the power disparity.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#425Even 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 ones who buy adds? Not many success stories out there. It's hard to believe the economy is dumping almost 100B/year into a product that doesn't work.
Freakonomics have a great episode on this - https://freakonomics.com/podcast/advertising-part-2/
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#426I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…
>> If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectly somehow. For the sake of argument, lets assume FaceBook is a top-grade product that people currently don't pay for with money. It exists because advertisers pay FB. The targeting of ads to individual users allegedly…
I don't really even mind if Facebook is targeting ads to me based on the stuff that I do on Facebook. It's when Facebook, and Google, Amazon, whoever, start reaching their tentacles into other spaces where I can't get away from them or don't give them consent that I have a problem.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#427I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…
Switch back to content based ads, which is what we had prior to the internet. If you have a car related product, advertise on car related websites. Don't try to advertise to a car person visiting a Jazz music site.
I think going back to content based advertising will greatly improve the quality of content on the internet.
The way it works now, the most valuable content is the cheapest content that can get valuable eyes to look at it, which leads to clickbait and low effort content.
If advertisers can only make ad decisions based on the content, quality content will be more valuable.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#428Often 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…
> Often I hear the argument, people saying "I prefer ads that are relevant for me over random ads". But... You don't even need your "but" (so hold on to it), because this is a classic false dichotomy anyway. Targeting does not require spying nor does spying tend to improve targeting. Basic immediate context (what you're doing, not who you are) works better for both advertisers and willing consumers than personally in…
> Basic immediate context (what you're doing, not who you are) works better for both advertisers and willing consumers than personally invasive intrusion does
How are you quantifying this?
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I prefer ads that are relevant for me over random ads I froze up the first time someone said this to me. Of course I prefer random ads, cause this way they're less likely to push the right buttons on my vulnerable monkey-ass brain. Do people think tailored ads are good for them instead of consumerism triggers? Messed up worldview.
There are products out there that would increase my quality of life that I'm not aware of or not actively thinking about. In an ideal world ads are about informing the consumer, so absolutely ads can provide value to you as well. One of the recent life improving products I never thought about before an ad is an electric toothbrush - honestly I saw them but I considered it a silly gadget. Saw a plug in a random video,…
Yes, there are plenty of products out there that I would like to discover. But these are one in a hundred. I'd gladly sacrifice the few valuable ones. In fact I already do this, because I use adblockers and pi-hole as much as I possibly can.
I'm not completely against marketing. I pretty often buy things advertised in podcasts, stuff that obviously paid for product placement in specific places. But those are ads that fit the medium, usually they're very related to the topic at hand. This is not at all the case with all random bullshit that shows up on Facebook and YouTube. Those are most often than not ads full of toxic subtleties like unreasonable standards of living, body image and success.
Re: Facebook users said no to tracking, and now advertisers are panicking
#430I dislike being tracked as much as the next guy, but I often wonder what "our" ideal end-game goal is? By "our" I mean the typical HN crowd that understands both the technological and the economical implications of this. If we want top-grade products to remain available without a direct monetary transaction (i.e "free"), it seems we must give something that the product providers can turn into monetary value indirectl…
I think the issue is that there isn’t a transparent option to pay directly. Why not say “opt out of tracking and pay $5/mo, or allow ad tracking” and see what people choose?