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

Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 311 posts

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#281

Post by eitland »

danShumway wrote: post #127
gregorythecat wrote: post #48

Given the attitude on HN about iOS14, I don’t think most here grasp the implication of gutting ad attribution. All publishers (news sites, indie games, etc) are going to see huge drops in CPM. It could easily be a business ending shift. Sure removing IDFA will help protect user privacy, but let’s not kid ourselves that there will not be collateral damage. Being a third party publisher will be that much harder and wal…

> I don’t think most here grasp the implication of gutting ad attribution. > All publishers (news sites, indie games, etc) are going to see huge drops in CPM. It could easily be a business ending shift. Your second statement might not imply the first. It could be that publishers are going to see business disrupting shifts in CPM, and we are aware of that fact, and still support the changes. "Why is everyone praising…

> At the same time, there's something really telling that after all of the years of the advertising industry talking about how users actually want to be tracked and targeted, they are nonetheless terrified of something as simple as a prominent opt-out button.

I actually gave it a chance. The problem was during that time the ads (from Google) were more irrelevant.

Back in the old days you could often see how ads were relevant to the topic of the web site you were visiting or the topic you searched for even if they weren't always relevant to me (e.g. selling expensive software while I was a broke student, living outside the US).

The next years - sometimes after the Double Click acquisition it seems - I started seeing almost only irrelevant ads everywhere.

I don't have anything against companies making money - in fact I liked it when Google were earning good money before Double Click. But when they add invasive tracking and the quality goes way down at the same time something has gone wrong.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#282

Post by creato »

Nextgrid wrote: post #126
noxer wrote: post #38

The online ads business is collapsing. I predicted that some years ago and now the first signs become visible. First data collecting will be come harder and harder because people simply don't want that anymore. Then if targeted ads are no longer possible we have a level playing field again where everyone can deliver ads not just the big players. And finally if ads do no longer pay for everything on the net we will fi…

I think the online ad business is collapsing (collapsing might be a strong word, but there's definitely a bubble bursting and the market needing a big readjustment) not because of technical problems but simply because people have a certain amount of time and attention and anything beyond that is a waste of money. The advertising industry unfortunately did not understand that and most people are saturated with ads (cr…

Understand that the ad industry isn't a monolith. The advertisers shoveling shit ads onto local news websites aren't making some grand bargain for short term revenue at the expense of long term consequences (blocking, etc.). Those advertisers simply wouldn't exist otherwise. They're filling a small niche while they can. The fact that their behavior might cause the whole industry problems over the long term does not matter to them.

Google, FB, et al would love it if these shitware ads disappeared because fewer people would feel the need to block ads. But there's really nothing they can do about it without being shouted down (or worse) as being anticompetitive, regardless of whether that's true or not in this case (and there probably is some truth to it).

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#283

Post by kevindong »

kalleboo wrote: post #279

What amuses me is that all Apple is doing here is putting up a dialog asking if the user wants to be tracked. And Facebook knows just how much users hate being tracked, so they are avoiding the API that results in the dialog. Yet their rhetoric is "tracking is great and people love it! they're going to be so sad once tracking is gone!"

> Yet their rhetoric is "tracking is great and people love it! they're going to be so sad once tracking is gone!"

I would not characterize Facebook's post that way. Facebook's post doesn't mention the impact on/reaction from the end users at all.

My interpretation of all this is that no reasonable user would consent to the tracking anyway and the marginal benefit of users who do consent is outweighed by users who are creeped out and decline the tracking.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#284

Post by bjelkeman-again »

eitland wrote: post #281
danShumway wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t think most here grasp the implication of gutting ad attribution. > All publishers (news sites, indie games, etc) are going to see huge drops in CPM. It could easily be a business ending shift. Your second statement might not imply the first. It could be that publishers are going to see business disrupting shifts in CPM, and we are aware of that fact, and still support the changes. "Why is everyone praising…

> At the same time, there's something really telling that after all of the years of the advertising industry talking about how users actually want to be tracked and targeted, they are nonetheless terrified of something as simple as a prominent opt-out button. I actually gave it a chance. The problem was during that time the ads (from Google) were more irrelevant. Back in the old days you could often see how ads were…

Then you don’t have to deny tracking. But for the rest of us who want to deny tracking I like this, collateral damage or not.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#285

Post by m463 »

renewiltord wrote: post #226
danShumway wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair though, don't you remember how the DNT header worked really well for everybody involved, and how all these advertisers today universally respect it, and how they totally didn't abandon the entire concept as soon as it started seeing mainstream use and platforms started turning it on by default? What could go wrong if we give them another spot at the table? I mean, PRAM has already released so many good pla…

We respected it in our ad pixel server. DNTs didn't get tracked, just returned 200 blank, no logs generated. It didn't matter, though, in the end. Didn't get us positive/negative attention, users didn't really care, browsers stopped supporting it, and then it was just dead code. Left the guard clause in, in the end, because of some misguided need to "do the right thing". It's just dead code. I'd just get rid of it no…

> users don't care about this stuff

we do.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#286

Post by eitland »

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #284
eitland wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the same time, there's something really telling that after all of the years of the advertising industry talking about how users actually want to be tracked and targeted, they are nonetheless terrified of something as simple as a prominent opt-out button. I actually gave it a chance. The problem was during that time the ads (from Google) were more irrelevant. Back in the old days you could often see how ads were…

Then you don’t have to deny tracking. But for the rest of us who want to deny tracking I like this, collateral damage or not.

I do resist tracking now and also changed to iOS last year.

It was a younger version of me that gave them a chance.

They failed hard.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#287

Post by [deleted] »

miki123211 wrote: post #146
snowwrestler wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, at one time you could build apps on Facebook that basically downloaded all of a user's data when they used it. The Obama campaign built an app that you could use to find your Facebook friends who hadn't been contacted by the campaign yet, so you could call them on the campaign's behalf. I heard of other political operations that built a "wish [famous person] happy birthday" app solely so they could grow their…

This is a perfect example of the tradeoffs between openness and privacy. If you give dangerous tools to users, you will have a few cool things and lots of tech-illiterate users screwed over. Privacy advocates often preach solutions like the fediverse, without understanding that the fediverse is a privacy disaster for the tech illiterate. Cambridge Analytica wouldn't even be preventable on Mastodon, and it would have…

[deleted]

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#288

Post by dialtone »

A2D5F69A wrote: post #276
dialtone wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can 100% easily disable tracking with Google and Facebook. They both are required by GDPR and CCPA to provide the tools to do that. In both cases you can go in your account and disable targeted ads. Do it.

> disable tracking with Google and Facebook > go in your account and disable targeted ads Those are not the same thing.

GDPR and CCPA give you control to stop tracking altogether, not allowed to drop cookies to you. I fail to understand how that would be different.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#289

Post by renewiltord »

m463 wrote: post #285
renewiltord wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We respected it in our ad pixel server. DNTs didn't get tracked, just returned 200 blank, no logs generated. It didn't matter, though, in the end. Didn't get us positive/negative attention, users didn't really care, browsers stopped supporting it, and then it was just dead code. Left the guard clause in, in the end, because of some misguided need to "do the right thing". It's just dead code. I'd just get rid of it no…

> users don't care about this stuff we do.

Right, should clarify that I mean "Users do not act in a manner that reveals they care about this". I.e. the majority of users won't use a product that's more compliant with the spec over one that does an extra thing they'd like.

Re: Preparing Our Partners for iOS 14

#290

Post by jacobush »

miki123211 wrote: post #146
snowwrestler wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, at one time you could build apps on Facebook that basically downloaded all of a user's data when they used it. The Obama campaign built an app that you could use to find your Facebook friends who hadn't been contacted by the campaign yet, so you could call them on the campaign's behalf. I heard of other political operations that built a "wish [famous person] happy birthday" app solely so they could grow their…

This is a perfect example of the tradeoffs between openness and privacy. If you give dangerous tools to users, you will have a few cool things and lots of tech-illiterate users screwed over. Privacy advocates often preach solutions like the fediverse, without understanding that the fediverse is a privacy disaster for the tech illiterate. Cambridge Analytica wouldn't even be preventable on Mastodon, and it would have…

It’s like the Drake equation - you will have to multiply with the risk that FB goes truly rogue. If they do, they have ALL dirt.
Post reply on HN