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

We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

blog.sentry.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 191 posts

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#71

Post by njitram »

zztop44 wrote: post #3
junon wrote: post #2

I kept waiting for their findings but halfway through it's just a bunch of self-gratifying talk and deflecting talking about why they think it's important - I read for two solid minutes without them getting to any hard numbers or findings.

It does have findings, it’s just a long article. Maybe longer than it needs to be. Looks like their SERP ads CPC increased by 30% and conversions decreased, display ad conversions plummeted (partially offset by cheaper CPMs) and YouTube ads switched to optimize for watch time instead of conversions seemed to perform better and lead to cheaper conversions.

This is probably whats going to happen everywhere, Google will be even more dominant in adtech with 3rd party cookie removal. Everyone moving to 1st party advertising (SERP, Youtube ads), display ads are race to the bottom without targeting..

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#72

Post by dylan604 »

brown_martin wrote: post #52

Thanks for sharing. Appreciate you taking the time to share your experience and results.

Well fellow marketing person, what was the experience? You seem to be the only one that speaks the language to know. The rest of us are left wondering what the point of this self back patting exercise actually was.

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#73

Post by itsoktocry »

janwillemb wrote: post #10

The title is quite clickbaity, especially since sibling comments say that the article doesn't tell what happened.

So you didn't even read an article you describe as "clickbaity"?

Maybe try reading it, there's a lot of "what happened" in there.

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#74

Post by itsoktocry »

dylan604 wrote: post #72
brown_martin wrote: post #52

Thanks for sharing. Appreciate you taking the time to share your experience and results.

Well fellow marketing person, what was the experience? You seem to be the only one that speaks the language to know. The rest of us are left wondering what the point of this self back patting exercise actually was.

>You seem to be the only one that speaks the language to know.

Here's one conclusion I grabbed, randomly:

"we saw around a 30% increase in our cost per click (CPCs) in Google search."

The average HN user thinks marketers (and MBAs) are stupid, and assumes they can master the industry if only they put it a few days effort.

Maybe you aren't the intended audience?

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#75

Post by ezfe »

dylan604 wrote: post #72
brown_martin wrote: post #52

Thanks for sharing. Appreciate you taking the time to share your experience and results.

Well fellow marketing person, what was the experience? You seem to be the only one that speaks the language to know. The rest of us are left wondering what the point of this self back patting exercise actually was.

The conclusion section clearly outlines it:

- Issues you're already having will get worse in 2024 - Cookieless performance marketing is achievable - You will need all your stakeholders aligned - You will need to reimagine how you do things

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#76

Post by jefftk »

soyyo wrote: post #69
jefftk wrote: post #63

While they removed cookie banners and say they no longer include dependencies that set cookies, browsing around the site for a bit I still see several cookies set. For example, visiting https://changelog.getsentry.com I get first-party cookies "_GRECAPTCHA", "ph_phc_UlHlA3tIQlE89WRH9NSy0MzlOg1XYiUXnXiYjKBJ4OT_posthog", and "_launchnotes_session", plus third-party cookie "_GRECAPTCHA" on recaptcha.net. Similarly, visi…

I believe that under GDPR cookies that are used only for technical purposes and not related to personal information are exempt from any consent and don't need to be informed with the infamous cookie banner. Is not about cookies, is about their content and purpose.

Cookie banners predate the GDPR, and were initially a response to the ePrivacy Directive of 2002: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPrivacy_Directive

While the GDPR has added additional restrictions, the basic framework is still in force: you can't store information client-side (cookies, localStorage etc) unless (a) it is "strictly necessary" to fulfill a user request or (b) you get user consent. All the cookies above look to me like they don't meet that bar; the site seems to still fulfill my requests with cookies disabled.

(Not a lawyer.)

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#77

Post by Waterluvian »

soyyo wrote: post #69
jefftk wrote: post #63

While they removed cookie banners and say they no longer include dependencies that set cookies, browsing around the site for a bit I still see several cookies set. For example, visiting https://changelog.getsentry.com I get first-party cookies "_GRECAPTCHA", "ph_phc_UlHlA3tIQlE89WRH9NSy0MzlOg1XYiUXnXiYjKBJ4OT_posthog", and "_launchnotes_session", plus third-party cookie "_GRECAPTCHA" on recaptcha.net. Similarly, visi…

I believe that under GDPR cookies that are used only for technical purposes and not related to personal information are exempt from any consent and don't need to be informed with the infamous cookie banner. Is not about cookies, is about their content and purpose.

Indeed. Cookies are incredibly useful for things the user really does want, like staying logged in across sessions/tabs.

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#78

Post by jefftk »

Waterluvian wrote: post #77
soyyo wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that under GDPR cookies that are used only for technical purposes and not related to personal information are exempt from any consent and don't need to be informed with the infamous cookie banner. Is not about cookies, is about their content and purpose.

Indeed. Cookies are incredibly useful for things the user really does want, like staying logged in across sessions/tabs.

A login cookie does not require a consent banner, because logging in is an explicit user request. But I didn't log into Sentry in my testing.

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#79

Post by btbuildem »

EDIT: classic, didn't dig into the context, assumed Sentry was some ad ecosystem middleman -- apologies for the below (will leave as it was because there are child comments). These guys have a real product doing real things.

----

It's fascinating to me how this org (and so many others) are hard at work, day in and day out, basically shovelling garbage into peoples' faces. They produce absolutely nothing of value (other than, arguably, the parasitic relationship which allows Free Content), but so much money flows through them.

I wonder what effect the exclusion of third party cookies will have on the dark patterns that are so prevalent -- but I doubt it will be much. We may have "free" access to so much information online, but we pay a terrible place as the quality of discourse has devolved into antagonistic feces-flinging in most of the big walled gardens, and majority of the open forums. It seems only the domain-specific, niche places still maintain a quality noise-to-signal ratio.

Re: We removed advertising cookies, here's what happened

#80

Post by M2Ys4U »

master-lincoln wrote: post #55
rob74 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But even if you only use your own cookies, you will still have to show one of those annoying cookie banners first...

Sometimes I think the ad industry made up the misleading term cookie-banner. At least GDPR does not limit the technology used for collecting personal information. You still need to ask for consent if you track users with some other technology. Using cookies does not require consent under GDPR, collecting and sharing PII does though (if not necessary for the service to function)

It's the ePrivacy Directive (and not the GDPR) that prohibits storing any data on the user's machines unless they are a) strictly necessary to provide the service, or b) the user consents.
Post reply on HN