81–90 of 187 posts
This update seems to have touched a nerve for FB, and that to me means it's a good thing. I'm not a fan of Apple's restrictive ecosystem, but things like this that act in favor of user privacy deserve praise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am extremely torn about this thing, especially as I work in the privacy space. But it's hard to ignore the argument put forward by Ben Thompson that better tracking for facebook, actually tends to help small businesses. If you can't hyper target, you get ads for tooth paste, cars and deodorant (TV ads). If you can then you get ads for boutique florists in your area or gadgets you might actually like. I don't know w…
Is there any research how much benefit "hyper targeting" actually gives? Not just "it helps" but quantitatively (e.g. more effect than 30 just mildly target adds? Or just more effect than 2?) In particular, how does it compare to somewhat targeted offline ads like (local shop advertising in local newspaper) or (car stuff advertised in car enthusiast magazine)? Also, the question is about having a level playing field.…
> https://twitter.com/DaveStangis/status/1339183289349918721
"cut of 60% per advertising dollar." So between 2 and 3. That is incredibly little for all the surveillance it brings with it. And I don't think fb would understate here.
If "hyper targeting" is that useless, why are even still discussing allowing it?
What is the price differential between contextual ads (you searched for "running shoe" have a nike advert) and personalised ads (you are Paul, we know you have a heart condition and low income and are going through a divorce - have an ad for this dating site while you search for running shoes) Duck Duck Go clearly think there is profit in contextual ads - and I would love to find out if there is any hard evidence out…
This is the million (or trillion) dollar question. I doubt its 1%. In fact I think its more like 2-3-4x revenue from personalised ads. Just a hunch. (side question - how do you do context ads for FB news feed? Because I can see it working well for youtube, if you know the topic of the video. Or google search, where you know the search. But I don't see how you can't NOT use personal ads in a newsfeed, whether on FB or…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also don't mind being tracked. If I must see ads, then I rather see relevant ads. There is nothing bad in this. I don't understand the facebook/google bashing here. It's not as you could advertise on apple for something against apple. It should also be clear to you what game Apple is playing here. Their end game is to do the tracking themselves and then they will slowly introduce and sell ads themselves. Their mark…
I would argue that using mass amounts of collective and your personal data to tap into your psychology and encourage more consumption isn’t good per se. Apple has been around an awfully long time now to assume their end game is to own ad tech...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am extremely torn about this thing, especially as I work in the privacy space. But it's hard to ignore the argument put forward by Ben Thompson that better tracking for facebook, actually tends to help small businesses. If you can't hyper target, you get ads for tooth paste, cars and deodorant (TV ads). If you can then you get ads for boutique florists in your area or gadgets you might actually like. I don't know w…
Being pro-Small Business doesn’t meant you have to be pro-Advertising. Facebook makes a killing taking money from small businesses through advertising, yet it is consistently one of the lowest ROI marketing techniques, not to mention generally creates the worst UX. Can you build a successful business on advertising? Yes. But I’d argue that you don’t need to. Almost every service I pay for came to me by word of mouth.…
It also takes a lot of money from governments and political campaigns. The micro-level targeting allows highly specific messages to be shown to people matching a specific segment and contradictory messages to be shown to another segment. It's disingenuous of Facebook to claim this is just about small business when it's arguably about undermining the foundations of democracy.
What is the price differential between contextual ads (you searched for "running shoe" have a nike advert) and personalised ads (you are Paul, we know you have a heart condition and low income and are going through a divorce - have an ad for this dating site while you search for running shoes) Duck Duck Go clearly think there is profit in contextual ads - and I would love to find out if there is any hard evidence out…
This is the million (or trillion) dollar question. I doubt its 1%. In fact I think its more like 2-3-4x revenue from personalised ads. Just a hunch. (side question - how do you do context ads for FB news feed? Because I can see it working well for youtube, if you know the topic of the video. Or google search, where you know the search. But I don't see how you can't NOT use personal ads in a newsfeed, whether on FB or…
I don't feel like it's reasonable to expect that Facebook should have access to the history of all the websites I've visited, and data on the content of those websites, so it doesn't seem reasonable that they should be using that data to target ads at me.
Similarly for Google, targeting ads based on things I've searched for on Google is entirely reasonable. Targeting them based on the fact Google Maps has picked up a BLE beacon saying I was in a particular shop seems a lot less reasonable - Google frankly have no business knowing that I was in that shop, especially given there's unlikely to be any signs up notifying me that my visit to that store is being tracked.
I guess my underlying issue isn't in companies doing personalised ad targeting, its in the massive pools of seemingly unrelated data they're collecting to do that targeting. I've been immersed in the world of technology and aware of privacy issues around it for decades, and even I'm surprised by some of the things that are being correlated for the sake of a 0.25% increase in conversion rate. The average person doesn't have a hope of keeping track of what's being done, and changes like bringing that data collection front and centre when installed apps is a really positive move.
"At Facebook, small business is at the core of our business." Has someone here worked in marketing/PR? How can people write stuff like that and not feel incredibly dirty? This is a mostly honest question. Every time some super big company starts some campaign feigning compassion or act the victim I just want to barf.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> once people actually understand the scope of ad tracking networks... they don’t want it. I wish this was true but I have friends who want the perceived benefits. They firmly believe handing over that data benefits them. More relevant ads, more useful services and features, more free stuff, etc. I bring up yet another place I don't want to be tracked and they just retort they want to share as much info as possible.
I also don't mind being tracked. If I must see ads, then I rather see relevant ads. There is nothing bad in this. I don't understand the facebook/google bashing here. It's not as you could advertise on apple for something against apple. It should also be clear to you what game Apple is playing here. Their end game is to do the tracking themselves and then they will slowly introduce and sell ads themselves. Their mark…
Think of Nazis using church data to hunt Jews or the US government orchestrating drone strikes.
I am not saying things like this will happen to your Facebook data, it's just that church members in 1930 also could not foresee what would eventually be done using their data.
Data collections are inherently risky. We should just avoid them wherever we can. The world is changing, take a look at China. Just because young people in the West have only seen democracy, does not mean it will last forever.
This is why I love reading Gruber