zlacker

>>pbrw+(OP)
Hot take, it’s hard to have a free internet without ads. Lots of websites have marginal utility, but can be paid for with ads. And those websites will disappear when CPM rates go down the drain.

>>thornc+X6
There's a conspiracy here that people can't see.

Free sites will close without targeted advertisement, obviously; they barely can afford to pay salaries now, so with untargeted ads it will be impossible. And the only media sites that will be able to afford to run are those that are subsidised by the state. This is already happening in Europe, where most of the big media are practically bankrupt and their income comes from the state in the form of subsidies, ad campaigns, internships paid by the state, etc.

You already have a sibling comment in this thread precisely asking for that: the state paying for the media. How do they think this will end?

>>vasdae+48
I don't understand. We were able to run with untargeted ads for decades. Why now, suddenly only targeted ads are viable?

>>gpdere+2c
If you manage to normalize the unencumbered profiling of people's online behavior (which increasingly spans like 100% of what people do) you wield enormous power which can be monetized in countless ways. So its not just about the type of ads. It is about the legality of monetizing user behavior where that profiling, in particular involves collecting and integrating data way beyond any bilateral interaction.

This is not idle talk. Think e.g. about personal credit. An important consideration in certain banking models is filtering out good from bad credits. Guess what, so-called "alternative credit data" which include social media activity is already a thing (search for it).

Its basically a digital wild west. Greed, hypocrisy, misrepresentation, collusion, corruption. As a rule, anything that is not be prohibited by draconian fines and license removals will be done. The honeypot is irresistible and people left on their own are just digitally illiterate idiots.