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

Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

wired.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#11

Post by datatan »

TimJYoung wrote: post #9

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

Because by targeting the ads they can make eleventy billion dollars instead of just 10 billion.

It's about value. Ads were cheap back then because you couldn't be sure the people seeing them cared. Now that you can be reasonably sure you can charge more for the experience.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#12

Post by nercht12 »

Where do you draw the line for the "ban" though? ISPs, Google, and many of these companies collect PI for payments and associate these payments with invoices/receipts/etc. so in effect, they already have some of this info. We could ask for no analytics code on sites, but then we speculate on what code belongs to the "analytics" and what is there merely for "services". The latter would blanket everything. Besides - who's going to do the inspecting? Some inspector with his pockets full of lobbyist money? Some disinterested bureaucrat? A ban is pointless. What is really needed is for businesses to find a more effective advertising means that doesn't entail collecting so much PI.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#13

Post by zebrafish »

TimJYoung wrote: post #9

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

I wonder if there is any data around effectiveness of targeted advertising. How many lipsticks were sold before social-data-backed target advertising? How many lipsticks have been sold now that we know which shades and "influencers" a particular person prefers? I guess I could go search for it.

You would have to imagine there would be an uptick. However, in my own mind, the targeted ads don't influence me to spend as much money as the broad-based brand awareness type. There's a term for that style of advertising which I can't remember right now but it basically entails plastering "Tide" over everything so that the next time you think of detergent, you think of Tide.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#14

Post by floor__ »

mankyd wrote: post #6
yuhong wrote: post #5

Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."

And yet... To make up an example, when I walk into a movie theater, I prefer to see ads for movies that I might actually go see. If I have kids, I might be interested in the latest G-rated film. If I don't, that probably won't tempt me. Location alone doesn't tell you that info. I kind of like getting at least some specificity and personalization with my ads.

I think most people research movies before going to see them, I rarely purchase something without researching it. IMO the less invasive the better, if I have to see an ad id prefer it to be general. IMO the benefits of personalized ads are far less than the cost of having them. Given your example the ad supplier would know if you have kids or not.. In getting this info what else do they know about you? Are your kids adopted? Are you married? Sexual orientation etc.. The cost is great to have personalized ads.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#15

Post by bobajeff »

yuhong wrote: post #5

Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."

Look. I don't want to be tracked, cataloged and tailored to without my permission. I don't care how accurate they are (in my experience not very much) it's invasive and creepy.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#16

Post by bobajeff »

TimJYoung wrote: post #9

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

Because it's an invasion of privacy.

If you have a personal conversation to a friend about a party you had when you were five you don't expect to hear details referenced by a busker the next day at a park you frequent.

Edit: I was arguing with no one.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#17

Post by falcolas »

mankyd wrote: post #6
yuhong wrote: post #5

Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."

And yet... To make up an example, when I walk into a movie theater, I prefer to see ads for movies that I might actually go see. If I have kids, I might be interested in the latest G-rated film. If I don't, that probably won't tempt me. Location alone doesn't tell you that info. I kind of like getting at least some specificity and personalization with my ads.

Sure it does. You're in theater X, at a time that movie Y is playing. Based on those two bits of data, that's enough to market to you based on movie Y.

There's no need to know your age, ethnicity, gender, or anything else to be able to market to you while you're at movie Y.

Even more accurately, there's not even a reason to know your location, if they simply market according to the movie you're already paying to watch.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#18

Post by TylerE »

TimJYoung wrote: post #9

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

"Still worked" is very hard to quantify. Traditional media advertising is basically impossible to put hard numbers on.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#19

Post by ginko »

mankyd wrote: post #6
yuhong wrote: post #5

Looks like their argument is that "We don't need ads that are personal. You can just get ads that are based on location."

And yet... To make up an example, when I walk into a movie theater, I prefer to see ads for movies that I might actually go see. If I have kids, I might be interested in the latest G-rated film. If I don't, that probably won't tempt me. Location alone doesn't tell you that info. I kind of like getting at least some specificity and personalization with my ads.

When I walk into a movie theater, I already know what movie I'm going to see. Ideally I don't want to have to see 15-30 minutes of trailers before the actual film starts either.

Re: Opera’s founder calls for a ban on tracking on Facebook and Google

#20

Post by stan_rogers »

bobajeff wrote: post #16
TimJYoung wrote: post #9

I don't understand why people are so enamored of personalized ads. Advertising was around a long time before personalized ads were even a thing, yet it managed to still work by targeting publications that matched the target customer. This was accomplished by geographic location, for general consumer ads, or by interest, for targeted ads, B2B, etc.

Because it's an invasion of privacy. If you have a personal conversation to a friend about a party you had when you were five you don't expect to hear details referenced by a busker the next day at a park you frequent. Edit: I was arguing with no one.

Just to clarify: "enamored of" is basically the same phrase as "in love with". You're agreeing with the parent post.
Post reply on HN