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

We accepted surveillance as default

vivianvoss.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 159 posts

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#141

Post by fsflover »

inventor7777 wrote: post #39
alt227 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its amusing that Apple itself is one of the biggest ad companies that exists, fed entirely from their own users private data. Yet by simply pointing the finger away from themselves and helping their customers block other ad companies efforts, they seem to have gained complete trust of all their users and most dont even know how much Apple are making in ad revenue from their own data. https://appleinsider.com/articles…

Yes, that is very true. Unfortunately, without a true non-Apple or non-Google OS, the ATT toggle is likely about as good as you can get. And it does stop the apps themselves getting raw access to your data, which is not something to sniff at.

A true non-Apple and non-Google OS already exists. Sent from my Librem 5 running GNU/Linux.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#143

Post by PaulHoule »

pjc50 wrote: post #140
snailmailman wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try to disable a lot of web tracking stuff, so I kinda understand if advertisers have trouble targeting me. But the information they should be able to use to target me just isn't getting used at all. Are other people getting well-targeted ads? because in my experience, ad companies suck at it. I constantly receive ads on Youtube in languages I don't speak. I can kinda make out whats happening in some of the ads, I…

> Now I finally no longer get as many ads for pornography and illegal drugs Always fun when the ads have less rigorous content policy enforcement than the actual videos. I occasionally use non-adblocked youtube, and I think the ads were mostly Audible/Jet2 holidays? I don't think I've ever seen a local business ad on there, presumably because making a video ad in the first place is expensive. The places for local bus…

They are rare but I have seen ads for local businesses in a 100,000 person market.

Given how much you can spend on text or banner ads I don't think the cost of producing a video ad is prohibitive these days, particularly when it can be a voiceover + graphics + text, it's not like you have to hire 15 union members to do it the way they do in L.A. Even back in the late 1990s it was a well kept secret that ads on local cable were a good deal compared to newspapers and radio.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#144

Post by cindyllm »

PaulHoule wrote: post #143
pjc50 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now I finally no longer get as many ads for pornography and illegal drugs Always fun when the ads have less rigorous content policy enforcement than the actual videos. I occasionally use non-adblocked youtube, and I think the ads were mostly Audible/Jet2 holidays? I don't think I've ever seen a local business ad on there, presumably because making a video ad in the first place is expensive. The places for local bus…

They are rare but I have seen ads for local businesses in a 100,000 person market. Given how much you can spend on text or banner ads I don't think the cost of producing a video ad is prohibitive these days, particularly when it can be a voiceover + graphics + text, it's not like you have to hire 15 union members to do it the way they do in L.A. Even back in the late 1990s it was a well kept secret that ads on local…

[dead]

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#145

Post by [deleted] »

colesantiago wrote: post #128
GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i manage to do so using money i make elsewhere. the information i put on the internet is either of benefit to people or a matter of vanity. i don't afford special concern to people who want to use the internet for profit.

So you have never sold anything, or participated with other people or groups that have sold anything online because you believe that they should not use the internet for profit?

[deleted]

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#146

Post by GuinansEyebrows »

colesantiago wrote: post #128
GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i manage to do so using money i make elsewhere. the information i put on the internet is either of benefit to people or a matter of vanity. i don't afford special concern to people who want to use the internet for profit.

So you have never sold anything, or participated with other people or groups that have sold anything online because you believe that they should not use the internet for profit?

this rhetoric is not compelling to me.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#147

Post by PaulHoule »

curio_Pol_curio wrote: post #127
PaulHoule wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To their credit I did get this message from them today: We reviewed the ad you reported and found that it goes against our Advertising Standards. We let the advertiser know that we removed the ad, but not who reported it. Thank you for letting us know. Reports like yours help us to improve the integrity and relevance of advertising on Facebook. But mine was an absolutely open and shut case.

Ads on the FB & goog network (this includes phys.org btw) are NOT paper tigers, in the sense that they are a reliable anti-signal (to short, not to buy, to look at rising competitors, to look into reasons why a product might be failing, to sus out the lack of foresight in their investors, to extract other high cost channels/signals that they are still using ntless As an example of the last one, I just learnt about an…

Well you do know YOShInOn and I frequently find an article on phys.org that we think is interesting but will substitute a link to the paper that is referenced if it is open access. I respect their selection of topics and articles and, looking at alternatives, frequently their article on the topic is really the best. But damn their ads are awful. It's a conversation I have with them and sometimes with their advertisers ("did you know the adversarial design of that site made me click on your ad by mistake and wasted your spend?")

Maybe I should draw a firmer line for some of my values but in terms of my other values ScienceX is the best popular science publisher today by far. (compare Universe Today or Scientific American.)

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#149

Post by cute_boi »

unethical_ban wrote: post #57
pacija wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my case firefox + arkenfox + ublock origin advanced mode require all sorts of weird clicking to enable similar tracking :)

I haven't looked at arkenfox. But I went to the cover your tracks tool by EFF yesterday and it was still able to uniquely fingerprint my computer, even with Firefox strict privacy and unlock origin. I think unless you run stock mullvad/Tor browser, you're leaking who you are. Sad but true. I wish canvas and webgl fingerprinting were disabled/crippled by default.

it isn't difficult. Just use ip + browser memory + hardware like gpu + some parts of useragent + OS and it is going to be accurate like 95%.

Re: We accepted surveillance as default

#150

Post by babylon5 »

pizzly wrote: post #99
nazgulsenpai wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, and if you frequent tech circles you'd be under impression that the masses prioritize lack of surveillance and privacy. In my experience with IRL acquaintances, although anecdotal, exactly 0% of people I have spoken to where it's come up in conversation care at all about privacy or surveillance in general with the old "nothing to hide" fallacy.

I know its won't solve everything but couldn't we teach digital hygiene at school and its importance. For myself I remember in English at high school being taught how different methods of advertising worked and that stuck with me.

Education is good in general, but because alternatives are not common and sometimes not even allowed, there are very few places left to avoid surveillance. Educated or not. Not to mention our schools use google docs.
Post reply on HN