[maria_weber23]

> FLoC is an engineering solution to a political problem.

Yes.

> the problem with targeted advertising is the targeting

Is it? The problem with advertisement is the advertisement. I don't like to see ads at all, but one thing I know for sure, I'd take targeted ads at all time over random ads.

> People don't like seeing their web history funnel into their advertising.

No. This is the problem YOU have with it. Most of the non-tech people I know have no idea what you are even talking about.

[criddell]

I don't think the choice is between personally targeted ads and random ads though. There are middle options.

For example, if I search for "how to do a Subaru oil change" it's the perfect opportunity for the search engine to show me ads related to motor oil, Subarus, car maintenance videos, etc... If I opt in to sharing my location with the search engine they could also show me ads from local repair shops and car dealers.

Later on when I'm reading an article about dog training, I don't want to see ads about fixing my car, show me ads related to dogs. Use the context of the page for targeting.

[renewiltord]

Sure, search does really well for contextual because there is lots of intent. But most other contextual is not like that: people aren't looking to buy something.

Your normal usage isn't dog training or subaru oil changes. It's idle nonsense like whether Kim Kardashian is angry with Courtney Cox or whatever. There's not enough to sell you that's contextual. People have an idealized vision of what they spend time on. It's nothing like this productive stuff you're talking about.

[saagarjha]

Sometimes…sometimes not. I'm sure you've seen the blogspam articles that tell you how to fix whatever problem you're having with your computer and the first step is to download their product to do a "scan".

[ssivark]

Sure, but what about showing you ads for WhatsApp when you’re searching for Signal?

Where does contextual advertising/influencing switch from being helpful to being gaslighting?

[gwbas1c]

You must have no shame.

My wife buys diapers online, then ads for diapers show up on my computer.

I go shopping for underwear on one device, and then when reading a technical forum with co-workers on a different device, there's ads with people just wearing underwear.

The tracking is extremely excessive.

[jokethrowaway]

uBlock is free

[IfOnlyYouKnew]

That’s just the algorithm telling you to be more involved in childcare.

[bluesign]

But the problem is we are not getting targeted ads. We are getting semi-targeted ads.

If someone is paying 10 usd for conversion and you have chance to convert 1%, another one has 90% chance to convert but paying lets say 0.10 usd, even if you have 90 times better ad, ad network will show you the 1% one.

[jokethrowaway]

Privacy advocates need an excuse to advocate for privacy and impose more regulations for the Common Good.

Then we end up with crap like the cookie banner - which completely ruined the internet for me.

There is not a day I don't have to close one of those and browser extensions to block them are nowhere as good as blocking ads. Not to mention, accepting all the cookies is one click, while rejecting them either require 1 minute of thinking or browsing through popups and menus.

The fact that 99% of the people don't care is over their head. If people cared they would be using duckduckgo.

Funnily enough, I use duckduckgo and I think it's a great Google replacement - but I don't care about being tracked, I just appreciate the features (especially code snippets in search)

[swiley]

>I'd take targeted ads at all time over random ads.

Why?

It's not the content you want and the fundamental idea behind targeted ads is precise manipulation of people's behavior which is an extremely dangerous thing to have at scale.