zlacker

>>wyldfi+(OP)
This captures my feelings on the issue:

> That framing is based on a false premise that we have to choose between “old tracking” and “new tracking.” It’s not either-or. Instead of re-inventing the tracking wheel, we should imagine a better world without the myriad problems of targeted ads.

I don't want to be tracked. I never have wanted to be tracked. I shouldn't have to aggressively opt-out of tracking; it should be a service one must opt-in to receive. And it's not something we can trust industry to correct properly. This is precisely the role that privacy-protecting legislation should be undertaking.

Stop spying on us, please.

>>dlesli+Fb
Your browser recording history of web pages you've been and saving it locally is not someone else tracking you. Your perspective is seriously warped. Even if they were tracking you, they are doing so to give people better ads to make the world a better place.

>>charci+pC1
> to give people better ads to make the world a better place

If you say shit like this unironically, you can't ever accuse someone else of having a "warped perspective".

>>centim+ZC1
Unrelevant ads are a waste of time and resources for all parties. Getting rid of these waste benefits all parties. It's a win-win-win situation. I believe making society more efficient makes the world a better place.

>>charci+OT1
The word you're looking for is "irrelevant".

The technique is designed to encourage consumption. This does not necessarily make society more efficient; having frequent nags to consume product one does not need is wasteful.

It's more than likely that targeted ads make humanity less efficient, due to the widespread coercion to consume products and services that are not necessary for a healthy and happy life.