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

The EU's war on behavioral advertising

thisisunpacked.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 420 posts

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#191

Post by AlchemistCamp »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #160
amadeuspagel wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter and youtube had chronological feeds for years.

5 min on yt shorts and I'm fed a diet of Andrew-Tate, Joe Rogan, or if I disagree with this genre and rage-click it away, I get left-wing US hate on why aren't you outraged about Dave Chapelle - because you should be? Youtube feed for content discovery of intelligent men has died long time ago. It is US propaganda at it's finest but for a global audience.

YT shorts gives me almost exclusively shuffle dance videos, language learning / expat videos and super uplifting stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Yp84ARq7kQ0

I don't want to watch hours of it, but it's definitely a positive slice of my day.

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#192

Post by troad »

legitster wrote: post #99
btbuildem wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish Canada would grow a pair, and stand up to the big social media platforms -- especially in the light of the latest shenanigans with the availability of / paying for news. Whichever side of that debate you fall on, you have to admit that meta et al are in a position to strong-arm a country and have an impact on its laws. That's a terrible precedent, already having played out in Australia. Anything that ch…

Canada is saying FB has to pay if they want news on their platform. FB doesn't make any money off of promoting news articles for free, so they take news off their platform. What's the controversy? Was FB just supposed to pay for news out of their own goodwill? I'm no Meta defender but I'm also very confused about what the legislators thought the law was supposed to do.

> I'm no Meta defender but I'm also very confused about what the legislators thought the law was supposed to do.

Cui bono?

The law was supposed to siphon funding from foreign companies to Canadian media, who the Canadian government are in bed with. That's why it doesn't appear to make sense: it's not public-benefit lawmaking, it's plain ol' corruption. Same as the earlier Australian law (there, it was Rupert Murdoch leaning on the Coalition government which he largely kept in power with his local media empire).

It's why the Canadian government is so apoplectic about it; Meta's unexpected pushback exposes the law to scrutiny it simply cannot withstand, and highlights a rather unsavoury side of the government in having ever passed it.

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#193

Post by konschubert »

btbuildem wrote: post #46

Interesting how this is forcing these companies to objectively improve their products -- chronological feeds, friends and follows only, etc is what users have been begging for and being ignored, because advertising trash salad is more profitable. If the long-term effects end up being along the lines of the big social corps withdrawing from the EU, I see that as an enormous win for that economic zone. The presence of…

I want a feed with recommendations and I want a feed that's not just friends and follows.

I don't want my government to tell me what I should like.

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#194

Post by permo-w »

btbuildem wrote: post #46

Interesting how this is forcing these companies to objectively improve their products -- chronological feeds, friends and follows only, etc is what users have been begging for and being ignored, because advertising trash salad is more profitable. If the long-term effects end up being along the lines of the big social corps withdrawing from the EU, I see that as an enormous win for that economic zone. The presence of…

I suspect "suggested content" is not going anywhere. the profit incentive is now lower, but it's still in these company's interests to keep you as engaged as possible for as long as possible, and the casino model is the best way they've found to do that

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#195

Post by permo-w »

konschubert wrote: post #193
btbuildem wrote: post #46

Interesting how this is forcing these companies to objectively improve their products -- chronological feeds, friends and follows only, etc is what users have been begging for and being ignored, because advertising trash salad is more profitable. If the long-term effects end up being along the lines of the big social corps withdrawing from the EU, I see that as an enormous win for that economic zone. The presence of…

I want a feed with recommendations and I want a feed that's not just friends and follows. I don't want my government to tell me what I should like.

your government is not telling you what you should like, they're making people literally spying on you for profit something that you aren't opted into by default. if you want people to spy on you for profit, click accept, you still have that option

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#196

Post by pedrosorio »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #160
amadeuspagel wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter and youtube had chronological feeds for years.

5 min on yt shorts and I'm fed a diet of Andrew-Tate, Joe Rogan, or if I disagree with this genre and rage-click it away, I get left-wing US hate on why aren't you outraged about Dave Chapelle - because you should be? Youtube feed for content discovery of intelligent men has died long time ago. It is US propaganda at it's finest but for a global audience.

here is what I get: track&field, chess, some music

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#197

Post by [deleted] »

thih9 wrote: post #174

> Prior to ATT, every app by default had access to your advertising ID, i.e. it was opt-in by default. Nitpicking, it was not opt in, as the user did not opt in. It would be more accurate to say: "consent was implicit", or even "the app could access the user's advertising ID without the user's consent". I feel that it's important to distinguish "opt in" as something that requires explicit user action.

[deleted]

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#198

Post by katbyte »

djhn wrote: post #163
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 min on yt shorts and I'm fed a diet of Andrew-Tate, Joe Rogan, or if I disagree with this genre and rage-click it away, I get left-wing US hate on why aren't you outraged about Dave Chapelle - because you should be? Youtube feed for content discovery of intelligent men has died long time ago. It is US propaganda at it's finest but for a global audience.

Well out of the people you mention I only recognise Joe Rogan By name - never seen anything of his in my recommendations. Almost 20 year old YouTube account. I watch shorts regularly as well.

Are you in the USA? I think it’s very country specific

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#199

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

"Meta recently conceded that in-app behavioral advertising in the EU can no longer be opt-in by default, marking the end of an era. The regulators won, at least for now."

"Opt-in by default". In other words, "opt-out". Is this some wordplay designed to "comply" with regulations against opt-out.

Yes, it's opt-in, with the opt-in box already checked to save people the trouble.

Sounds like a so-called "dark pattern".

Re: The EU's war on behavioral advertising

#200

Post by Symbiote »

legitster wrote: post #145
avianlyric wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m confused, do you prefer chronological feeds from friends and family or not? GP is saying that feeds driven by friends and family would be an improvement to their products, and new EU law will drive that behaviour by making it hard for companies like Facebook to indiscriminately force black box recommendation algorithms on people. Isn’t that exactly what you say you want? And thus you agree with this statement > I…

> I’m confused, do you prefer chronological feeds from friends and family or not? Yes. I would prefer this. FB no longer gives me a customized feed. I get a generic feed tailored to my demographics - brain achingly dumb posts about Disney and Marvel and memes I don't care for. And I am unable to unsubscribe from any of them because none of them are based on my preferences. This has been FB's response to the EU sancti…

I went through the earlier process of objecting to personal data processing.

Since then, my feed has been 25% videos of trains and model railways, 50% vaguely sexist or sexual jokes (blondes, 'little Johnny' etc) or cartoons, 25% posts from random Anglophone police forces showing them catching speeding cars, or advising to use seatbelts.

As a whole I think it's good evidence that they no longer use anything they know about me to show the adverts.

Post reply on HN