| No, I personally want to see ads that are as irrelevant as possible. I hate getting a sales pitch forced on me, and would rather see something funny or entertaining showing off an irrelevant product in a clever way than whatever your customers want to shove in front of my eyes. This is why I block all ads, but still appreciate super bowl commercials. And I have discovered that this actually works on me. I like the Nike ads, so on the occasions when I buy sportswear, I have positive feelings about Nike stuff. I spend 100-10000x more on stuff that isn't sportswear, but I think Nike gets more value from me watching that ad than anyone who advertises some "relevant" SaaS product or whatnot. |
| |
| ▲ | pclmulqdq 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't give a shit what advertisers want. I was merely pointing out to someone in the ad business that I don't want to see relevant ads when they made the statement that I do. This is something that people in advertising say a lot, but it's generally not true. I do not want or benefit from you having "better" ad targeting - I will find your product if I want it without the sales pitch. | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Why does your individual opinion matter to Google (or advertisers or their markets) then? It’s probably not even possible for decision makers to discern it from noise. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The advertisers are the ones trying to claim that it's a win-win situation because people like relevant ads. Pointing out that many people don't like relevant ads is then a significant thing to acknowledge. You're acting like pclmulqdq brought up the idea out of nowhere, which is very much not the case. What people think about ads does matter, and does affect the bottom line. And it's just annoying for you to act like the dislike is just an "individual opinion" but the "people like relevant ads" claim isn't equally anecdotal. | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 4 days ago | parent [-] | | I’ll be charitable, what is your actual argument? In case you didn’t see, the user has already claimed to believe the entire comment chain is irrelevant, so your a bit late. | | |
| ▲ | Dylan16807 4 days ago | parent [-] | | They specifically said their original point still stands, and I agree with them. > what is your actual argument Was it not clear? Okay I can try again. When advertisers claim that relevant ads are something people want, that's very far from being universally true. Lots of people don't want that. Don't let them use that unsupported claim to support tracking. Note that the desires of advertisers are not part of this particular argument. It's a simple claim and counterclaim. | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 3 days ago | parent [-] | | How does that follow? And why is your agreement relevant either? Anyone can have an unlimited number of irrelevant opinions that they believe to possess this or that attribute, they may even genuinely believe so, yet it doesn’t amount to anything. Even if the claimed argument was flawless… it seems strange to put a non sequitor at the beginning. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | pclmulqdq 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | My individual opinion is (presumably) not unique. They also absolutely can tell who is a decision maker: around 2015, people used to serve facebook ads specifically to VCs to get investment in their startups. I'm sure targeting has only improved. | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 5 days ago | parent [-] | | This doesn’t make sense as a reply, it’s not relevant how many others share your opinion, because it’s not aggregations of people replying to each other on HN, but specific users. Each user’s comment has to stand up under its own weight so to speak | | |
| ▲ | pclmulqdq 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. The original point stands, though: not everyone benefits from better ad targeting. | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > Cool, yours is as irrelevant as mine. So then why did you reply if you already knew your comment and the rest of the comment chain was irrelevant? |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | maujun 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | It doesn't make sense financially. But money is not the only thing that matters. My emotions matter. If I see a scary person who is not my friend, I yell "put him down" in my head, and take actions. If that scary person knows more about me than I know about myself. I bark like a small dog. Arf! Arf! Arf! In English, that roughly translates to "Get out of my sight! Get out of my head! Then I'll feel fine again." If this doesn't make sense to you, then you are suggesting a world where money/truth matter more than emotions. But then why do people make money, if not just to survive? Arf! Arf! Arf! (This originally translated to: "Don't engage with me unless you value low-status people") | | |
| ▲ | MichaelZuo 5 days ago | parent [-] | | This still doesn’t make sense. Since everyone values emotions differently... there would still need to be some intermediary, like money, for emotions to have any agreed upon value at all beyond narrow circles. Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value? | | |
| ▲ | maujun 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I like the idea. With money, we can value emotions. Since everybody has some money, everybody's emotions (outside of children) will have positive value. Relating to my original example: I, as a provider of PII, feel scared about my information being sold. If Google has a $100/year option to stop my PII from being spread, I would consider buying it. However, I predict now some people feel angry. They feel Google should not be allowed to do this. They won't pay Google to stop, they will go to the govt. Considering this problem, I wonder what is the next step we would need to do to ensure a world of positive emotions and money. > Otherwise what’s stopping, e.g. nihlists, from valuing your emotions at zero or a negative value? Well, I think a lot of people value my emotions negatively, especially angry people and corporations. In particular, corporations like to take money and make it time consuming for me to get a refund. As for people, I am at peace because I cannot change my skin color, face, or personality, but I can adjust my goals to be smaller/non-overlapping. | |
| ▲ | ambicapter 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | "The only way to understand emotions correctly is through money" What a take. | | |
| ▲ | pyrale 5 days ago | parent [-] | | We need a market for emotions. Want a good laugh with your friends? That'll be $10. A moment of peace with your so? That'll be $100. Rewards of up to $.50 for people willing to be scared to death (or, you know, moderate social media content). | | |
|
|
|
|
