I like how the assumption seems to be that the thing users object to about "websites track your browsing history around the web in order to show you targeted ads" is... the "websites" part
holy fuck, that’s such a good description of the shitty marketing tactic google is trying here. they’re shifting focus away from the awful shit they’re doing more of to something that doesn’t matter
When I worked in agencies you could pick the suits that had lost touch with reality by how much they seemed to believe that targeted ads are useful enough to be some kind of public service. Now google use the same rhetoric to justify user tracking
on the engineering side, I keep having to turn down executive feature requests with “this is functionally indistinguishable from malware”
Sites you visit can ask Chrome for your interests to show you ads.
Nifty. Let's ask what my browser has to offer instead (Firefox + uBlock Origin).
Sites can not show you ads.
Hmm that's a tough choice hmm.
Google already has your browsing data if you use chrome, whether you agree to this or not. stop using chrome.
I think that this actually at least appears to be a good step from google.
Third parties no longer need to know who you are. As i understand it, chrome can directly deliver only the necessary information just when it is needed. No external saving of data required.
Also: get over it. Most of the internet works, because people learn of products and then buy them. Personalized ads are sent to show people things, which they specifically might be interested in. People want to sell products and solely this allows many websites you probably like to use, to exist in the first place.
No one here is inherently evil or owns you, because they can show you relevant marketing.
Also: get over it. Most of the internet works, because people learn of products and then buy them.
holy fuck I’m so sorry you think this is it, that this broke-ass business model is all that ever existed for the internet, that you’ve never experienced the good bits that used to be relatively plentiful but are now rare
…it’s also kind of fucking stupid to post an opinion like this on the fediverse of all places
it’s also kind of fucking stupid to post an opinion like this on the fediverse of all places
this is the best mic drop savagery I've read in a while. There is no coming back from it.
Third parties no longer need to know who you are. As i understand it, chrome can directly deliver only the necessary information just when it is needed. No external saving of data required.
This isn't better at all. Sure, there are fewer parties that collect the data, but that just means only google can sell access to it, which gives google a near monopoly. This is only good if you think Google deserves more power and influence.
Also: get over it. Most of the internet works, because people learn of products and then buy them.
Nice. "The internet only works if you let them manipulate you with your private info" is quite the take, especially when you're on a website that works without it. Next you'll say, "ads might work on you, but i'm just built different".
It's not like marketing has to be an essential part of the browsing experience, either.
How would the interest break without ads? I can't see that happening.
solely this allows many websites you probably like to use, to exist in the first place.
I'm used to loss. Bring it on.
but how will we survive without our favorite passionless low-quality content designed to drive ad impressions with no other goal in mind
Oh no, what if some of my favourite
CONTENT CREATORSweren't able toCREATE CONTENTas a profession for the lack of advertising revenue. We might regress back to the barbaric days of 2009!
In the spirit of rationalism I’m going to invent terminology for something that probably already has better terminology, and spout a bunch of unsubstantiated stuff. Ads would be fine if advertising campaigns were zeroth order only, by which i mean, purely to publicise products with no effort to “sell” you on something. First order they try convince you to buy something, without lying. Second order is where they begin lying by omission, third order is when they begin outright lying. Higher orders are increasingly kafkaesque/dystopian. E.g.:
- any publicity stunt
- Influencing ideas about identity to sell a product, i.e. real men eat meat, dolls are for girls, etc.
- manipulating your personal ethics to launder the ethics of a company, e.g. an oil company urging an individual to go green so that the oil company doesn’t have to
- legal racketeering, i.e. lobbying for regulatory measures that force people to buy something
- any participation in a political campaign
The list goes on. As advertising has continued and the profession has been refined, the overton window of what was considered in good taste has shifted to include these increasingly perverse strategems.
Everything big tech has done with advertising just adds to the list. They’ve broken the window completely. To use a term from our old pal Yud, the “inscrutable matrices” that make up their personalisation algorithms might show you more relevant content alongside ads, but they will also trigger a positive feedback loop radicalising you into one ideology or another. See: facebook q-pilling middle america.
Example how even with much criticism Google is going to do their ideas anyway.
Ah yes, Google the benevolent gatekeeper to my user interest metrics, surely not to sell them to anyone who is willing to pay the smallest pittance upon mere request.
and the state. don't forget they also sell this data to law enforcement and the defense agencies. even if you believe you have nothing to hide, this should worry you because LE can and will cherry pick the data to manufacture a case against you if the whim suits them - given adequate quantities of data, you can reach almost any conclusion you want if you put on strong blinders and interpret only the convenient subset.
some times wonder if it's worth building a service where someone pays a pittance as a test fee and then gets presented with whatever you can get together on them via RTB ads
because just showing someone the amount of data carried in an RTB packet is too disconnected from reality (which gets closer to "the bidder probably has your house geolocated just from the ad data on that one add the android app shoved in your face without warning"
(of course, the RTB houses would likely want to kill such a service because it would show just how much shit they tie together)
A thought I had a while back with google (and any other tech company I guess) with the same emotion that Rorschach has just before Dr. Manhattan disintegrates him: if they’ve already won, aka achieved virtual dominance over how we experience the web, then fine. Fucking break me with your personalised ads. Show me deep cut references from my personal life as emotional leverage. Orchestrate my nightmares with jingles. Show me the logical end of advertising. Just fucking end the human experience entirely since you’ve monetised all our dignity away anyway. Anything less than that is just an insult to my ability to hope.
Anyway yeah I hate this. Big ick
I wouldn't mind filling out a survey for this type of stuff. Then I only tell them and they only know what I want them to. But they want the whole hand not the finger.
Plus I wouldn't see the ads anyways. Only reason why I even forward that option, it's that I know I can (still) sidestep the important part.
"Chrome is finding new ways to increase tracking and keep you even if you want to leave. Chrome also steals your interests and prevents you from managing them. Then, sites you visit can buy your interests from Chrome and force feeds you ads."
There I fixed it.
