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

Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 250 posts

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#241

Post by Cederfjard »

Cederfjard wrote: post #236
mrguyorama wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s way more difficult than just asking Facebook who already knows, though. You could go out of business before you manage to build that audience, if you ever would have. Cry me a river. If your business can only be sustained by a 3rd party implementing a massive, global, impossible to avoid and opt out of tracking and surveillance apparatus, I genuinely don't care if it fails. Weiner dog slides aren't that impor…

That’s a valid opinion. My point was just that arguing that this change has had no effect on small businesses (except those who are run by ”lazy” people) doesn’t make much sense. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong, of course.

That Apple’s change is wrong, I mean.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#242

Post by edgyquant »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #109
thomasahle wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither does Google or Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/help/152637448140583 Both of them hold on to your data and allow advertisers to target based on it. Just like Apple does.

The parent's claim was that Apple is a lot better at privacy than Google. It looks like they are basically the same. You could just as accurately claim that they are all equally bad.

This is a bad faith representation of my actual claim. Which is that apple has been better at privacy which they have.

Google tracks you to allow for highly targeted ads while apple doesn’t.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#243

Post by ThunderSizzle »

Nextgrid wrote: post #183
smoldesu wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a moot-point. Switching away from AdSense isn't going to protect you from surveillance, it's just going to change the pool of customers buying your information. All your iCloud data is a few clicks away for most NSA employees, and I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that they also have root capabilities on your iPhone. No matter how you slice it, Apple isn't going to give you privacy. The data you hold near-…

> is a few clicks away for most NSA employees I'd rather have NSA employees having access to my data rather than NSA employees and employees of the hundreds/thousands of players in the digital advertising ecosystem.

I'd rather have the digital advertising ecosystem have my info and the NSA have none.

I can say no to ads through self discipline. They can't force me to give them money.

The NSA can come with guns to lock me up because the current political leaders disagree with my opinions.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#244

Post by Nextgrid »

ThunderSizzle wrote: post #243
Nextgrid wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is a few clicks away for most NSA employees I'd rather have NSA employees having access to my data rather than NSA employees and employees of the hundreds/thousands of players in the digital advertising ecosystem.

I'd rather have the digital advertising ecosystem have my info and the NSA have none. I can say no to ads through self discipline. They can't force me to give them money. The NSA can come with guns to lock me up because the current political leaders disagree with my opinions.

It would be very hard to make sure the NSA doesn't have your info if thousands of other unscrupulous players have it and trade it.

One danger of this cancer having infected everything is that back in the day, if the NSA wanted to track people, they'd need to either exploit an existing feature that collected data (which there weren't many, and no guarantee people used them) or convince developers to include backdoors which had its own risks. Any large-scale spying required them to build & maintain infrastructure.

Nowadays, the cancer that is advertising provides a business reason as to why everything should be collecting data, so now the NSA effectively got to outsource their spying (without even any coercion!) and can just ask for the results.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#245

Post by russiasux »

kurupt213 wrote: post #227
vineyardmike wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea but people don’t spend a lot of time on weiner dog forums, even weiner dog owners. People want to advertise to customers where the customers actually go . Customers actually go to Facebook not weiner dog forums. Don’t use Facebook if you don’t like the value proposition. I’m guessing most people who complain about tracking on HN don’t use Facebook properties anyways.

This is a bad arguement. People who want products and services go to Google and search for them. Then, after the purchase has been made, your web experience is filled with ads for the product you already bought.

This is because Google wants to sell ads for impressions advertisers don't want and restricts their ability to filter out users who LOOK like people who might but stuff, but are actually people who bought stuff already. No advertiser wants to advertise a product someone already bought to that customer... And yet that's the default (and nearly impossible to eliminate entirely).

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#246

Post by adamsmith143 »

tobyjsullivan wrote: post #138
adamsmith143 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Operating a business with a single point of failure is never wise.

Operating a business with a single point of failure is a risk to be considered in the risk:reward analysis. For many businesses, it is a reasonable risk that enables unique solutions. It's important to observe that the parent didn't suggest regretting building that business even though the customer-acquisition channel evaporated. They merely said that option is no longer viable for future businesses.

> Operating a business with a single point of failure is a risk to be considered in the risk:reward analysis. For many businesses, it is a reasonable risk that enables unique solutions.

Then they didn't compute the risk correctly. A risk that some other entity could at any moment turn off your entire sales funnel which would, with nearly 100% certainty, ruin your business ought to be one no one should take. I'm not going to cry for those people that did.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#247

Post by mrguyorama »

Apocryphon wrote: post #211
mrguyorama wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that ecosystem is entirely opt in. If you are okay with a walled garden that you can't control, that's on you. Apple tracking what you do in all of their various properties and apps that they've built to try and be your one stop digital life isn't perfect but it is IMO categorically better than going to a random website and having my data get scooped up into my google account or my facebook shadow profile. If…

The average user is not aware that the walled garden is still tracking them, especially with Apple's charm offensive about how it is more privacy-respecting (probably since their refusal to submit to FBI mandate to unlock the iPhone of the 2015 San Bernardino shooter). Click-through EULA is click-through EULA, no matter what company generates it. That Apple tracking is better than that of other, more egregious offend…

If apple doesn't track you outside of the ecosystem, then that is genuinely a better outcome IMO than the google and facebook status quo. That you DO have an option to stop it entirely, by giving up apple services and products, is also a genuinely better option.

Some people aren't against advertising, analytics, etc in the more limited case like apple has. I don't think it's false advertising for apple to say "we respect your privacy" when they have demonstrated that they respect it better than the other companies in the advertising industry.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of better. It is damnation by faint praise, but that's because the bar is literally on the floor here.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#248

Post by Apocryphon »

mrguyorama wrote: post #247
Apocryphon wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average user is not aware that the walled garden is still tracking them, especially with Apple's charm offensive about how it is more privacy-respecting (probably since their refusal to submit to FBI mandate to unlock the iPhone of the 2015 San Bernardino shooter). Click-through EULA is click-through EULA, no matter what company generates it. That Apple tracking is better than that of other, more egregious offend…

If apple doesn't track you outside of the ecosystem, then that is genuinely a better outcome IMO than the google and facebook status quo. That you DO have an option to stop it entirely, by giving up apple services and products, is also a genuinely better option. Some people aren't against advertising, analytics, etc in the more limited case like apple has. I don't think it's false advertising for apple to say "we res…

I'm not saying it's not a better outcome, I'm saying that it should be merely a start and not something to be celebrated.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#249

Post by edgyquant »

whatgoodisaroad wrote: post #17
edgyquant wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the assumption that it isn’t? Apple has been a lot better at privacy than places like google. Not betting on this being the one exception. They absolutely are better if it’s true they don’t do any tracking

On the other hand, Apple has been much much worse at privacy than Google if you are Chinese.

This isn’t incorrect but your privacy options when dealing with China are limited so Apple either has to chose no privacy or limited privacy for that market.

Governments exist to regulation the actions of economic entities like companies. It’s an infinite regress to argue about apples privacy stances in china.

Re: Apple surpassed $3.5B in annual revenue from its ad network

#250

Post by praestigiare »

justapassenger wrote: post #101
praestigiare wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who have obviously made their preferences clear that they prefer not to be profiled and tracked that way, because the possibility is still there for those who consent to tracking.

It’s merely a corporate story (from both sides) that people made informed choice about that. It’s full of BS everywhere. Apple fighting for privacy is BS (look at China). Ads networks not affecting privacy is BS. Reducing effectiveness of ads not affecting small business is BS. Moving monopoly in ads market from one group of companies to others being good for people is BS. People understanding impact of all of that o…

Apple does not need to be a white knight who does no wrong anywhere for me to make the informed choice that I prefer their policies in my current country at the current time, nor for me to choose not to be tracked.

I don't think anyone claimed that reducing ad targeting did not affect small businesses. What they claimed was that small businesses do not have a right to target ads against user preferences.

Post reply on HN