zlacker

[return to "EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram"]
1. kwanbi+07[view] [source] 2023-11-02 11:29:19
>>pbrw+(OP)
I know in HN there is a big "personalized advertising" is bad sentiment, but I don't get what the problem is.

I mean, if I am looking for a notebook, I rather have FB/IG (or Google or whatever), show me adds of a notebook that I might end up buying, instead of the generic poker/porn adds that we had on the beginning of the internet.

It is almost impossible to have a free internet without ads. So on one side, people want everything free, on the other side, we don't want ads, so there is a clear problem here.

Can someone explain to me what the problem is? Honest question. Thanks.

◧◩
2. xlii+5d[view] [source] 2023-11-02 12:01:02
>>kwanbi+07
A scenario from today, context: I don't have Meta/Facebook/Instagram account, my spouse has.

We were discussing haircuts in the morning and I showed her some photos online. 15 minutes later she opened Facebook and saw hairdresser commercial with THOSE EXACT haircuts we were discussing.

I was using iOS with no-track and adblocker on top of that. My guess is that link was made using IP address. Meta/Facebook was processing MY data to which I didn't agreed at any point. Most likely some website (which didn't ask for my permission, as I'm very anal about making sure I disagree to everything) shared this data with Facebook, Facebook linked the dots and voila.

That's my problem.

P.S. We did similar experiment 2 times, once with jewellery and once with specific types of shoes. One using Firefox Focus using home WiFi, second using 5G network. I disagreed to all cookie processing at any point.

WiFi connection was linked, 5G wasn't.

◧◩◪
3. Bryste+6N[view] [source] 2023-11-02 15:06:44
>>xlii+5d
> We were discussing haircuts in the morning and I showed her some photos online. 15 minutes later she opened Facebook and saw hairdresser commercial with THOSE EXACT haircuts we were discussing.

Genuine question but what's the harm here? Or what's the negative consequence? I understand that this is creepy, people find it uncomfortable or odd, but what about it is harmful or so negative?

◧◩◪◨
4. I_Am_N+VI1[view] [source] 2023-11-02 18:41:17
>>Bryste+6N
>Genuine question but what's the harm here?

It incentivizes companies to gobble up any and all data they can about people. It incentivizes companies to increase the silent intrusion into our lives. It incentivizes companies to forget their "markets" are actually people -- extracting value from markets is taking resources from people.

Hypothetical scenario - with 23andMe and other DNA profiling places being targets for lots of different kinds of data thieves, what are the chances that "leaked" datum ends up in some kind of ad profiling system? Ad companies might know you have cancer before you do because your genetics hint at it, your purchase history hints at it, your online behavior changes might hint at it. Yet instead of alerting you that you might have cancer, they use those hints to sell you "life extending supplements" or homeopathic remedies promising to fix one of the symptoms you have. They squeeze you for money while you are still alive to be squeezed because you aren't a person, you are an ad profile. A cash cow.

Ad companies are not out for our benefit, they are out for their own. Just like every other company whose goal is to make money, they will throw people/consumers under the bus to save profit. So why would we give them any more leverage over us?

[go to top]