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

The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

blog.zgp.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 76 posts

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#11

Post by akersten »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #8
gruez wrote: post #3

I'm not sure what this blog is complaining about. >Problem one: Over-rating search, social, and app store ads Isn't this a problem with today's ad attribution system? The author doesn't try to argue how the new system makes it worse. >Problem two: Incentives for extra tracking Same as above. It sounds like he's against attribution in general, which is an okay position to have, but I'd rather he say this upfront and m…

Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. Still, the author has some interesting points I hadn't considered before. I guess from the advertiser's perspective this standard could be a concern, because the loss of cookie-based tracking might make it harder for them to develop alternative attribution tracking methods that don't have the same data quality problems.

> Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing.

The mistake is assuming this replaces anything instead of becoming just one more piece of the tracking puzzle.

Even if it did "replace" cookies or whatever, it's strictly worse than "before" because it's giving advertising a front seat in the browser. My browser should be doing precisely nothing to help you attribute your ad impressions or whatever. But now Mozilla et al have to waste their time maintaining and augmenting this opaque piece of mathematical faff.

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#12

Post by devmor »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #8
gruez wrote: post #3

I'm not sure what this blog is complaining about. >Problem one: Over-rating search, social, and app store ads Isn't this a problem with today's ad attribution system? The author doesn't try to argue how the new system makes it worse. >Problem two: Incentives for extra tracking Same as above. It sounds like he's against attribution in general, which is an okay position to have, but I'd rather he say this upfront and m…

Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. Still, the author has some interesting points I hadn't considered before. I guess from the advertiser's perspective this standard could be a concern, because the loss of cookie-based tracking might make it harder for them to develop alternative attribution tracking methods that don't have the same data quality problems.

> Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing.

Why can't it?

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#13

Post by Ajedi32 »

akersten wrote: post #11
Ajedi32 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. Still, the author has some interesting points I hadn't considered before. I guess from the advertiser's perspective this standard could be a concern, because the loss of cookie-based tracking might make it harder for them to develop alternative attribution tracking methods that don't have the same data quality problems.

> Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. The mistake is assuming this replaces anything instead of becoming just one more piece of the tracking puzzle. Even if it did "replace" cookies or whatever, it's strictly worse than "before" because it's giving advertising a front seat in the browser. My browser should be doing precisely nothing to help you attribute your ad impressions or whatever. But now Mozi…

This is a debate I've seen many times now on HN. I sympathize with what you're saying, but the flip side is that many users seem to prefer a free ad-supported funding model over a paid, ad-free model. If a site is going to be serving me ads anyway, then all else being equal I'd rather them make as much money off each impression as possible to incentivize them to keep providing me with free services. The privacy and resource cost of a user's browser sending anonymized attribution statistics is very minimal.

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#14

Post by Ajedi32 »

devmor wrote: post #12
Ajedi32 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. Still, the author has some interesting points I hadn't considered before. I guess from the advertiser's perspective this standard could be a concern, because the loss of cookie-based tracking might make it harder for them to develop alternative attribution tracking methods that don't have the same data quality problems.

> Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. Why can't it?

Because as GP alluded to, the thing it's replacing (cookies) already does exactly the same thing but isn't anonymized.

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#15

Post by theamk »

This seems like this is written by an advertiser who wants their profits, but pretending to care about privacy so they get users' support.

Here is a more honest summary:

"This proposal hurts us, small advertisement networks and professional marketers. Reject it, or we will ramp up the tracking to compensate for the lost opportunities!"

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#16

Post by theamk »

SirFatty wrote: post #10
sandcat_ wrote: post #5

> When Meta, Google and Apple [and Mozilla] agree on a “privacy” feature, watch out. ? This feels like a good sign, to me. I get far more worried when I see the likes of Meta, Google, Spotify, Epic etc team up.

And you think that they team up for your benefit?

Most people (and orgs) do things that benefit themselves. The question as a user, who is likely to be more aligned with you?

- Mozilla, Meta, Google, Facebook

- VP of "monetization technology" company, "Marketing data expert"

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#17

Post by nemomarx »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #13
akersten wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agreed, this can't be worse than what it's replacing. The mistake is assuming this replaces anything instead of becoming just one more piece of the tracking puzzle. Even if it did "replace" cookies or whatever, it's strictly worse than "before" because it's giving advertising a front seat in the browser. My browser should be doing precisely nothing to help you attribute your ad impressions or whatever. But now Mozi…

This is a debate I've seen many times now on HN. I sympathize with what you're saying, but the flip side is that many users seem to prefer a free ad-supported funding model over a paid, ad-free model. If a site is going to be serving me ads anyway, then all else being equal I'd rather them make as much money off each impression as possible to incentivize them to keep providing me with free services. The privacy and r…

Do you want to click through and spend money on the ads?

If not you aren't really working towards them paying a lot for ads, right?

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#18

Post by skybrian »

> Don’t look for a section on permissions or consent in that document, by the way. There isn’t one. And nothing about nerd lawyer stuff like “opt out of sale” or “objections to processing” in there, either. The Big Tech companies want a two-track system, where other companies’ ad features are required to do all the privacy regulation hassles, but the browser’s own built-in tracking feature is something that people have to find the right setting for and turn off.

This language to make consent popups sound good is suspicious. Not being interrupted while you're browsing is good. A browser setting that people can turn off once, for all participating websites, is good.

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#19

Post by gruez »

nemomarx wrote: post #17
Ajedi32 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a debate I've seen many times now on HN. I sympathize with what you're saying, but the flip side is that many users seem to prefer a free ad-supported funding model over a paid, ad-free model. If a site is going to be serving me ads anyway, then all else being equal I'd rather them make as much money off each impression as possible to incentivize them to keep providing me with free services. The privacy and r…

Do you want to click through and spend money on the ads? If not you aren't really working towards them paying a lot for ads, right?

>Do you want to click through and spend money on the ads?

Nobody "wants" ads, but they do want the free content they get today, which are funded by ads.

Re: The advertising cartel coming to your web browser

#20

Post by Ajedi32 »

nemomarx wrote: post #17
Ajedi32 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a debate I've seen many times now on HN. I sympathize with what you're saying, but the flip side is that many users seem to prefer a free ad-supported funding model over a paid, ad-free model. If a site is going to be serving me ads anyway, then all else being equal I'd rather them make as much money off each impression as possible to incentivize them to keep providing me with free services. The privacy and r…

Do you want to click through and spend money on the ads? If not you aren't really working towards them paying a lot for ads, right?

Maybe? Depends on what the ads are for. Obviously I'm not going to buy something I don't actually want just to support the site I'm on, but I have no particular objection to buying something I discovered through an ad if it's something I would buy anyway if I discovered it organically.
Post reply on HN