501–510 of 579 posts
Why is every journalist blaming Apple's Privacy. Like, use your brains, get a life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can’t use your Facebook account or something else for that? I’m pretty ignorant about ad tech, it’s something I’d like to learn more about.
So here's how IDFA works. User logs in to the Facebook app, and Facebook ties the user's IDFA to their Facebook account. User opens non-Facebook app X that uses the Facebook SDK for ads/tracking. App X sends the IDFA to Facebook, who then looks it up in their database and sees it on your account. They can now tie all user activity tracked by app X to the user's Facebook account. Without IDFA, this kind of cross-app t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I couldn't agree with you more here. To me, it's a clear sign that he "wears no clothes". The Metaverse presentation was the most idiotic presentation I've ever seen. He must be completely surrounded himself by people that just agree with him. It reminds me of this clip from Silicon Valley. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAeEpbtHDPw
I wouldn't describe the presentation as idiotic but it was hard to take seriously. The dream of immersive VR experiences showcased in Snow Crash and Ready Player One will be realized. But it won't be soon, and the ideas shown in the video--like the surfing game--were the kind of ideas that litter the floor of the App Store. Compelling product experiences, especially on new platforms, are extremely difficult to craft.…
Zuck may had well renamed his company "Flying cars".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
“ In short, if you're excited about iOS 14, you are more likely to be poor than not” Why are supposing that all rich people made their money through online advertising? It’s clearly untrue and certainly not a robust enough a conclusion to feel bad about your relative success.
> Why are supposing that all rich people made their money through online advertising
If you replace "all" with "most," which is how I phrased it, then your sentence sounds like this:
> Why are supposing that most rich people made their money through online advertising
Ok now we're onto something interesting, but I can see how you might be still struggling with the phrasing. May I suggest to reformulate as follows:
> Why are supposing that most rich people made their money by selling something for more than they paid for it?
Perfect! So we just have to answer if in the context of most people who became rich, "online advertising" = "selling something for more than they paid for it." I would argue that you can sell things without advertising them, but you certainly have to make people aware that you're selling those things one way or another (and mind you, in the context of rich people, you have to do that at a very large scale). So when answering how MOST rich people attracted attention in 2021, and that AT SCALE, I think the above is not so untrue (you will certainly find many who ALSO used TV and other channels, but very few people with a TV budget had a $0 paid social budget).
FB is one of the most developer hostile platforms that I've worked with. For example, their API tokens expire in 60 days, so users of automated reporting tools are constantly having to re-grant. Why? No good reason. And the documentation is garbage. FB can't blame Apple or anyone else for those failings. They should fix the things that are under their own control.
Have you done development on Apple platforms? That might push FB into second place....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, as a small business we are completely dependent on the ad platforms internal attribution tools, if they don't work or can't be trusted we won't use them. It's unfortunate that the incredably invasive tracking and profile building has become conflated with ad attribution. For us attribution is essential and we have little interest or use for invasive tracking. We just want to know from which ad a customer con…
What do you mean by conflated? The tracking and profile building is how they correlate results with ad impressions. That this data is then also used for training the models and identifying the user coefficients is just a different use of the same correlation data (a website visit is just another type of ad conversion, after all).
Nice how Zuck said $10bn in the analysts call with nothing to back it up, but the whole press jumps on it. Apple is not Facebook's problem, all they did was giving users a choice, which should have happened ages ago. So Facebook just says Apple kills our business without ever thinking that maybe users don't like the way they do business. If they did, they wouldn't opt out…
> Nice how Zuck said $10bn in the analysts call with nothing to back it up, but the whole press jumps on it. If Zuck knowingly gave investors bad guidance, I don't think that would go over well with the SEC: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b-5#Forward-looking... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-looking_statement