111–120 of 428 posts
> Re: forced Chrome logins. Don't need cookies if you own the browser! ( https://twitter.com/fasterthanlime/status/145209451374118912... ) The swindle with FLOC was pretty obviously tied in this, but people still went in circles discussing whether it's private or not, and downvoting those who said FLOC is a trap. Let's consult the plan, nothing is even secret about this: - Google disables third-party cookies, crippli…
I sometimes wonder, what if there was a universal governing principle, that was simple to enforce, obvious, formulated in few words, so that everyone understands it. All those priveleges which every of theese corporations enjoy, some simple, like not publishing schematic for 1000$+ device, some complex, like making backroom deals harming millions of people in a some insignificant and obscure way daily, like showing c…
Reputation.
> Re: forced Chrome logins. Don't need cookies if you own the browser! ( https://twitter.com/fasterthanlime/status/145209451374118912... ) The swindle with FLOC was pretty obviously tied in this, but people still went in circles discussing whether it's private or not, and downvoting those who said FLOC is a trap. Let's consult the plan, nothing is even secret about this: - Google disables third-party cookies, crippli…
Woah, so if a user is logged into chrome, Google has permission / is able to track all web activity for that user?
It takes two things for programs like "Jedi Blue" to happen. First, you need sociopaths in leadership positions who champion this 'great idea' they've figured out. These people often rise up in large companies because they are willing to do this sort of thing without any remorse. But second, you need developers to build it. A large number of them, usually, for a big project like this. Dozens of people like us knew th…
I don't now when this goes from being illegal to being just aggressive business. As long as I am not in trouble, I can also sleep well at night, even if some advertisers make less than they otherwise would have.
In fact, I can sleep very, very well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you, by chance, mistake ad blocking for AdBlock - the browser extension? 42.7% of users globally use ad blockers while Adblock has 65 million users. Surely, 42.7% of users is > than 65 million. Also, I don’t understand why you compared page views to users. It’s probably very uncommon for a user to install an ad blocker but also choose to enable or disable it on specific page views.
no, i didn't. nor can i comprehend how you got that idea. we were talking about how many people see internet adverts. you then linked a statistic implying that 42.7% of people wouldn't be reached because they're using adblockers. this is false, because most of these people will still be reached, as they're only occasionally using adblockers
I don’t think this is a common way people use adblockers. Do you have any way to back this up?
> nor can I comprehend
In your first comment, you mentioned AdBlock, the extension, in the context of 42.7% users using ad blocking technology. To me, it read like you thought that the backlinko url was saying 42.7% of internet users use AdBlock specifically.
What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…
Install Firefox and ublock on every single device of friends and family, including mobiles. Reject walled garden not allowing blocking ads.
Those are claims of an attorney general, right. Not something swore by oath from Google/Facebook. Claims from AGs strictly from conservative states.
Don't try to use political division to redirect people's anger at each other. I'm to the point where I'm deeply suspicious of the motives of anyone who deploys a novel way to recast an issue as partisan. I hope others are equally suspicious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
my fiance has bought several things that she saw constantly on instagram ads
My mother bought water bottles with cat ears that were advertised on Facebook. My wife bought a Mandalorian carpet advertised on Instagram. I bought custom-printed Canadian postage stamps advertised on Google in wedding card-related searches. They're sold directly from Canada Post.
When shady manufacturers are willing to do this kind of substitution on pet food [1] and medical supplies [2], one should expect any kind of safety regulations for fabrics, dyes, paints, etc to be ignored as well.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_pet_food_recalls
[2] https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/24/health/medical-gloves-us-thai...
Hello advertisers. You are being manipulated and abused just like the consumers you are targeting. There is very little evidence to show that invasive digital advertising is actually effective. When was the last time you clicked on one of these ads and actually made a purchase? Bad for consumers and bad for advertisers. Why continue with this opaque, profit sucking charade that mainly enriches those selling the ads?
What we found at a previous employer through extensive testing: advertising on Facebook works pretty well, but the highest return on ad spend was to not use any of the demographic tools at all. Also, weirdly, having an attractive product and displaying it well in photo and video ads did very well. Almost as if there is no real magic trick of effectiveness at all.
I paid to destroy my page haha. Fuckin Facebook
Those are claims of an attorney general, right. Not something swore by oath from Google/Facebook. Claims from AGs strictly from conservative states.
Your insinuation that this is politically motivated seems plausible, but even so that doesn't mean the assertions are wrong. Sometimes when you go on a fishing expedition you actually reel in a big one.