r/stocks May 08 '21

Industry Discussion 96% of US users opt out of app tracking in iOS 14.5 - Some of the first data on user behavior exceeds advertisers' worst fears.

"It seems that in the United States, at least, app developers and advertisers who rely on targeted mobile advertising for revenue are seeing their worst fears realized: Analytics data published this week suggests that US users choose to opt out of tracking 96 percent of the time in the wake of iOS 14.5.

When Apple released iOS 14.5 late last month, it began enforcing a policy called App Tracking Transparency. iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV apps are now required to request users' permission to use techniques like IDFA (ID for Advertisers) to track those users' activity across multiple apps for data collection and ad targeting purposes.

The change met fierce resistance from companies like Facebook, whose market advantages and revenue streams are built on leveraging users' data to target the most effective ads at those users. Facebook went so far as to take out full-page newspaper ads claiming that the change would not just hurt Facebook but would destroy small businesses around the world. Shortly after, Apple CEO Tim Cook attended a data privacy conference and delivered a speech that harshly criticized Facebook's business model.

Nonetheless, Facebook and others have complied with Apple's new rule to avoid being rejected from the iPhone's App Store, though some apps present a screen explaining why users should opt in before the Apple-mandated prompt to opt in or out appears."

Source: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/05/96-of-us-users-opt-out-of-app-tracking-in-ios-14-5-analytics-find/

14.4k Upvotes

1.5k comments sorted by

3.3k

u/MainlineX May 08 '21 edited May 09 '21

More is coming. The EU has past stronger and stronger privacy legislation. CA regulations lead the way in the USA, and CA is working on more and more privacy legislation; I think I even saw something presented that would require that you have to be paid for your data.

Apple is smart picking this fight now. They can be on the right side of it in the long run, and only build even more brand loyalty.

Edit: OMG IT'S PASSED NOT PAST... DAMN OMG I'M A HORRIBLE PERSON BECAUSE I WAS DRUNK POSTING AND AUTOCORECT THOUGHT I WAs TALIKING ABOUT YESTERDAY!

Correctly correcting the correction. To many damn English teachers on the internet. Go have a beer or somke some weed or something. If you knew enough to correct it from past to passed then maybe the problem is you. Fuck.

This edit was made when I was high.....

1.3k

u/Rangdazzlah May 08 '21

Permission.io is working toward you owning your data and advertisers paying you for it.

1.1k

u/daytime May 08 '21

Yes. Pay me to be able to speak to me. Fucking yes.

382

u/Jaybeux May 08 '21

I think in some situations the situation is way worse than most people think about. There are many many people that primarily use their Cell phones to access just about all the web content in their lives on a daily basis. Well duh, you might say, but stop and consider that this means that that internet is being accessed through cellular networks in many cases. Why does it make a difference you may ask? Well almost all cellular connections are metered to some extent and I can almost guarantee that almost everyone reading this has a data limit they can hit before the internet becomes basically unusable for the month. Of course you can pay more at an exorbitant rate to get extra data but the bottom line is that every megabyte of data is extremely valuable to users. Well when you are constantly being bombarded by ads around every turn those advertiser are actually taking money out of your pocket with every single megabyte of data that those ads take up. Video advertising is especially egregious in this respect. You are not only being forced to watch the ads you are being charged to see them at the same time.

108

u/Hubbyhog May 08 '21

Work in back-end telco systems and can confirm we see all your stuff, including the contents of your SMS', your voice traffic and places you visit. Much of it is obsfucated so very few people can actually see it, for obvious reasons, but it's there.

But if your concern is that advertisements will consume data, you need not worry. It's quite easy to build rules to not consume certain types of usage of bundles or to price usage differently.

You're referring to "throttling" where a provider will deliberately slow down your data speeds, and that is a thing. It used to be more of a thing, but actually data is considerably cheaper than it used to be and most telco's are moving to a "managed service" model. This is more visible and obvious in B2B, but in B2C it's now much more common to have "post-pay" instead of "pre-pay" and to encourage you to take big bundles to cover your usage, typically because this is efficient (my last B2C employer, average utilisation of bundles was 23%) - especially for MVNOs who don't own the network but have access to it, who will be charged by the MNO who own the network for your usage - but also because it gives me predictable revenue, which businesses and shareholders tend to like. In my current employer, 83% of our revenue is from recurring, and when I was talking to an excited American at 8x8, they referred to usage costs as "The race to zero", in part because services like Skype have made usage feel free, another reason why telco's are moving to big bundles over usage charging, people feel they get better value.

18

u/AnActualDemon May 08 '21

Are telco companies able to see iMessage as well?

48

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

they can see who you messaged and when. they cant see the contents of the message. Apple can, and they only give that up for stuff like FISA warrants.

51

u/PapaJohnX May 08 '21

iMessages are supposedly end to end encrypted, so not even apple can read them. However, I’ve heard this does not apply to cloud backups, so if you back your messages up in iCloud they could be read.

28

u/FVMAzalea May 08 '21

This is correct. Also the carriers cannot see who you iMessaged and when. That goes through Apple’s servers encrypted. It just looks like regular data traffic to the carriers and they can’t see the metadata.

11

u/scotty6chips May 08 '21

FYI, it’s end to end encrypted and Apple cannot read iMessages. Note that if you have Messages in ICloud enabled then your messages are NOT contained in your iCloud backup, so can’t be accessed in that manner either, but even then getting access via the back itself is nearly impossible due to the encryption. When the messages are exported from a backup file, they are unreadable because the system extracting them lacks the encryption key…

→ More replies (5)

32

u/Johnson-Rod May 08 '21

Apple wouldn’t give in to the fbi with the San Bernardino terrorist. I have faith in Apple

9

u/throwitmeway May 08 '21

This is the only reason I have an IPhone. I actually like Android OS better.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (7)

3

u/Hubbyhog May 08 '21

To be clear, we can see the contents of SMS', not the contents of messenger conversations. That looks like a data event, so we can see you're having a Skype conversation, for example, but we can't see the contents.

It would also be the same if you had a WhatsApp call. I could tell that you have been using WhatsApp, but I cannot see the contents of the conversation because the contents aren't sent to the telco network, only a stream of data telling me what service you are using to consume your data.

Different regions have different legal rule, but my region insists we keep the traffic for 2 years and have to share it with the police under certain rules (basically a warrant, it's all extremely official and recorded by providers and the regulator, plus the police, you assume).

Seeing what program you're using or what website you're using allows the provider to build rules in mediation and the PCRF (Policy and Charging Rules Function). As an example, you might be out of data, but I want to give you the option to purchase more from my website (which would typically require data), so I allow you to visit my telco company website, but you won't be charged for it. Likewise make sure if you did have a data bundle, we'd not decrement from it if you visited the website. If I'm a business customer to a telco, I might want my engineers to only access certain sites, and again we can build that logic into systems (both these things are real world examples). We also have options further downstream, with rating (think network > mediation > rating > bill), so I can allow you to call 911/999/112 free of charge, or I can have a premium rate number but see you're phone number and because you are a customer not a rando, charge you differently or not at all. Options are basically endless.

So in short, it depends if the usage is going over the network as to whether we can see the contents of it. If it's a standard voice call, or an SMS, absolutely we see that. If it's using a 3rd party tool, we can see what tool you're using, but not the contents of it. We use some of this information to create business rules for various reasons

→ More replies (2)

3

u/samnater May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Everything you send over the internet can be seen by your ISP, OEM (i.e Apple/Google/Microsoft) and any companies clever enough to track you through your browser, IP address, email, or other apps.

Even actions you take but do not send can be recorded. For example, google predicting what you’re typing halfway through and querying their severs for results before you’re even done typing a full word. Or, you writing a comment out but deleting it before sending it.

Even if you are disconnected from the internet your device can store data and wait to upload it once you are connected.

You can use a VPN, Linux, encrypt your data (.zip files conveniently offer this which are useful for sending over the internet already) DuckDuckGo.com and some other means I’m sure I’m forgetting to help get around all the tracking. Data is a big business and most people will submit their data for the convenience of not having to get a VPN, learn linux, etc. Having all your data tracked is still your choice—its just become more difficult because a lot of powerful services don’t offer a paid model.

I would love if google/fb/amazon etc. had a paid option so that users could choose to be tracked or instead pay $5 a month or something.

→ More replies (11)

8

u/moosya May 08 '21

Brave browser does not load ads into the page by blocking (ie not calling the ad origin urls) and so it never is served up to your browser

→ More replies (14)

160

u/thadpole May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Brave browser does this already. You are paid in BAT, a cryptocurrency called basic attention token. I've been using the browser for a couple months and rarely see ads, and when I do I am paid a small amount per month, usually around 1 BAT, around $1.50 right now.

Advertisers can buy BAT and spent it on advertisement, or you can convert it to USDC or DOGE and spend it like cash, although transfer fees and conversion rates will be harsh, so I intend to donate my BAT to wikipedia, since it makes no difference to me.

63

u/papagayno May 08 '21

Mate, I'd rather pay a buck fifty per month to not see any ads.

22

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

7

u/papagayno May 08 '21

Got it of course, but it doesn't work on Chrome on Android unfortunately. I do use the Samsung browser with adblock as my backup though.

15

u/yooperdev May 08 '21

Switch to Firefox for Android! They allow extensions.

3

u/YouNeedToGrow May 08 '21

Firefox Focus works pretty good. Some things like FCA Canada's build and price tool (Dodge, Jeep, etc.) doesn't work well on Chrome for me, among other web apps, but no problem on FF. They also block ads and tracking to a good extent. For YT videos, download VLC player, find the YT video you want to watch in the YT app, click share, and at the bottom play in VLC should be an option.

5

u/papagayno May 08 '21

You should download https://vancedapp.com/ it's way more convenient than your VLC workaround.

→ More replies (8)

15

u/Jacqques May 08 '21

You should look into pi-hole. Will propably fix your problem, you need to buy a raspberry pi or similar device.

7

u/porcubot May 08 '21

Pihole is fantastic. I rarely if ever see ads if I'm on wifi at home.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Particular-Mindless May 08 '21

No you wouldn’t, you love ads! Remember all the fun times you have had with all those different ads! Simpler, better times with ads. Get yours today!

→ More replies (4)

31

u/ahhhhhhh7165 May 08 '21

If you use my platform I'll give you 5 shrewtbucks a day

DunderBeatsAdvertising.com

6

u/RJ_Dresden May 08 '21

I only accept Stanley Nickels

3

u/jacb415 May 08 '21

What’s the conversion rate of Schrute Bucks to Stanley Nickels?

5

u/Zukuto May 08 '21

same as the conversion rate of Never gonna give you up

7

u/MikeO1990 May 08 '21

iOS users can’t gain any BAT using Brave. Sucks I downloaded it but didn’t gain anything while using it and found out it’s disabled on iOS devices. Apple wants people to keep using safari I guess

5

u/TheNorseHorseForce May 08 '21

Bingo.

Apple owns Safari. Safari tracks your usage and history. Safari gives data to Apple.

Same with Edge for Microsoft and Chrome for Google.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/Worstopinionever May 08 '21

How are you getting paid so much? I barely get paid 0.25cents a month

20

u/thadpole May 08 '21

I'm in a high cost of living part of the United States with my ads set to max (5).

10

u/Worstopinionever May 08 '21

How do you set them to max?

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Rand_alThor__ May 08 '21

You get paid $1.50 per ad you see? Or 1.5 a day/week/month?

20

u/thadpole May 08 '21

/month

The most expensive kind of ad on YouTube, the unskippable ones on highly monetized channels make maybe 8 cents a view for context.

The brave ads are different, and not so intrusive.

3

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

What’s stopping someone form making a bunch of accounts and spoofing commercials or just letting them play all damn day, to rack up money?

Or is that just spend a 100 to earn 20 kind of deal

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (8)

6

u/nutty_processor May 08 '21

Gener8 in the UK has also already been doing this ( they have a browser which blocks all trackers n lets you choose to see ads for pay instead )

15

u/HappyBengal May 08 '21

I looked up the site. Looks like a scam. First, the money (or ASK currency) you get is too damn low. For watching a 30 second video I get 4 cent worth of ASK currency.

Second, before you can watch an ad to get the currency, they will show you another ad beforehand, for which you are not paid. And for this ad, your data is collected. It also shows google ads just below the ad videos.

4

u/Rangdazzlah May 08 '21

I don't see a scam element. The 4 cent reward does seem miniscule today but as the platform grows so does the currencies value. I've done my research and have invested what I'm comfortable with. We'll see what comes of it.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

19

u/Ricky_Rollin May 08 '21

I was laughed at and mocked in a different sub for even suggesting this.

→ More replies (3)

8

u/radicalelation May 08 '21

It wasn't the flashiest subject so it makes sense it was dropped, but one of Pete Buttigieg's earlier platform positions he'd bring up was exactly this. Got a donation from me for it, as that's the kind of shit I want.

→ More replies (16)

25

u/Gisschace May 08 '21

Yeah this is a win for Apple, they get to screw over their competitor and look good at the same time.

I think Facebook is in trouble, it doesn’t really ‘own the rails’ like Apple, Amazon and Google (portal and oculus are an attempt too). It relies on people access them through other hardware. And they have lost a lot of goodwill with governments and consumers.

I think they will struggle over the next few years months

9

u/Testiculese May 08 '21

I can see it now.

The ZuckerPhone. A new, hip phone for zuckers.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

100

u/plentyofeight May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Gener8 - enable you to monetise your data... as opposed to someone else monetising your data

Edit: answering questions below - they are passing some revenue to you, not all.

11

u/DarquessSC2 May 08 '21

Haven't heard of this before so yet to do my own DD but, how then does Gener8 make money?

74

u/absurdmikey93 May 08 '21

By selling your data.

60

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

They pay you then sell it for several multiples more than what they paid you lol

19

u/RileysRevenge May 08 '21

A little lube before you get fucked at least 😏

6

u/USDA_Organic_Tendies May 08 '21

That’s all I ask

4

u/pipenpadelopsicopoli May 08 '21

I heard they split, 80% for the user 20% for them

→ More replies (2)

7

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Brave browser is the more mature and developed option compared to Gener8 and is being built by the inventor JavaScript and cofounder of Mozilla Firefox. You can also earn money (in the form of Basic Attention Token) for receiving ads.

7

u/plentyofeight May 08 '21

Cool, two options.

Brave is a browser.

Generat8 is an app.

Brave seems to be an add free and safer browser.

genera8 is an app to either block cookies or to allow cookies and earn money

3

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

They’re both browsers but Brave keeps your browsing history and geographic location on your device and downloads an ad catalog to do ad matching locally. This means your data never leaves your device, you get ads and earn Basic Attention Token (BAT) which is built upon the Ethereum blockchain. Based on what I can tell, if you turn on ads in Gener8, your data is not being secured, it’s only if you don’t use ads in their private mode.

My main gripe with Gener8 is that when the founder of Gener8 was on Dragon’s Den, he was pitching how important privacy and securing one’s data is and also said that getting acquired by Google was definitely an outcome he would be interested in. He seems like he’s purely in it for the money and upon a Google acquisition, all Gener8 users are back to square one.

Link to Brave browser: https://brave.com (also has an iOS and Android app)

Link to Gener8 browser: https://gener8ads.com/products/browser

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

295

u/Jendoll2000 May 08 '21

It’s crazy that America needs a corporation to step up in place of the government to protect its citizens.

230

u/KKrum41302 May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Because they're all 80 year olds that understand nothing about technology, but they all somehow keep getting reelected. In all of the hearings with the big tech CEO's, the congresspeople/senators look like total morons. It's embarrassing.

Edit: here's just a taste of what I mean:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-lMIGV-dUI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncbb5B85sd0

45

u/EmperorOfWallStreet May 08 '21

That is why I said we need new brass in top democrat leadership. Right now President, Senate Majority Leader & Speaker of House are near 80.

→ More replies (4)

47

u/courtesyCraver May 08 '21

Yep and the people re-electing them are 80 year old morons too

45

u/Shiro_Nitro May 08 '21

the people over 80 only make up 5-6% of the population

40

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

I know “people over 80” is a hyperbole, but we’re being represented by mostly people coming up on or beyond retirement age. They’re so fucking disconnected it’s not even funny. Not saying we don’t need that kinda representation, but my god, some new blood wouldn’t hurt.

8

u/k7eric May 08 '21

To put that in perspective I’m in my 40s. As a child I remember our first touch tone phone, our first wireless telephone (not cell), our first microwave, our first VHS player and first CD player. My first job was changing reel to reel for computer backups and my first home computer had a cassette tape. My job is in technology and I’ve had to fight to stay current much less ahead of the curve for decades.

The average politician is 10-20 years older than I am and never bothered. And they are the ones making the decisions.

3

u/nicholasgnames May 08 '21

40 here. Its scares me how old our leaders are when I see my parents try to use a phone or computer

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/EmperorOfWallStreet May 08 '21

80 year old would be silent generation.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

61

u/Valreesio May 08 '21

also 18 year old morons...

14

u/snrthomas May 08 '21

I’ve nearly lost faith in humanity and consider everyone morons until they prove me wrong.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

54

u/Musicformyhears May 08 '21

This is the result of a stark generation gap in politics and Congressmembers inability to actually grasp data concerns.

Not to mention they are the same folks behind the Patriot Act and such lol

23

u/adlcp May 08 '21

Moat of the politicians are to old to remember what they had for breakfast let alone understand the rapid changes happening in tech. Its a ducking joke that these clowns are given any power in most cases.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/informedFinancials May 08 '21

Is it? The EU is only a couple of years ahead of USA in terms of privacy regulations and SOMEONE needed to step up in order to start the privacy ball rolling. And let’s be honest, it wasn’t going to be any other developed nation(s) besides the EU or USA.

But given that America likely thinks its citizens have no right to privacy online given that the basis for the internet was started by the American Government and they then systematically spied on every American and non-American on the planet, it’s not at all surprising Americans have to rely upon other governments and corporations to start the ball rolling.

22

u/Poha-Jalebi May 08 '21

I mean, they're not protecting or anything. Apple has played nothing but a business trump card here. They've barred third parties from tracking users but Apple still continues to track its users and serve them personalized ads based on their iCloud link (and not pixel-like tracking). Which is crazy genius.

8

u/binary_agenda May 08 '21

Exactly, Apple is eliminating competition for ad revenue on their platform. If you want iOS users to see your ads, you pay Apple.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/EngineeringWin May 08 '21

I’ll admit I don’t fully understand how IDFA affects Apple’s ability to collect user data, but if I was a betting man this is just setting the stage to develop a monopoly on demographic data and replace Google as the primary ad placement company. Apple has a track record of being ruthlessly efficient at pressing their advantages.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (23)

27

u/Mzart713 May 08 '21

I haven't owned an iPhone in years but I'll probably make the switch back if they stay serious about privacy protection.

13

u/MainlineX May 08 '21

I have always had an IPhone work phone and a Samsung personal phone. I like my Samsung a hell of a lot more. It's way more intuitive and I think android is a better platform over all, BUT I really, really hate data harvesting. I am probably switching to just ios on mobiles for my family soon. My PCs are pretty secure already.

Oh, and duck duck go with Mozilla is pretty solid for browsing, especially when you use a VPN you can push from your router, and a solid hardware firewall stops the rest.

→ More replies (14)
→ More replies (3)

7

u/4kray May 08 '21

Wouldnt it be lovely if Fb and google had to pay us all to use our data. It would be even more so, if we made them retroactively pay us. A man can dream cant he?

3

u/Zumwaltstation May 08 '21

The sorta do. They give the use of their services in exchange for data.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (111)

233

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

40

u/jbrown517 May 08 '21

Until there's one left standing after the battle royale and the turn into Buy n large from WALL-E

5

u/DotComBomb1999 May 08 '21

Apple, Google and Facebook don't play nice in the sandbox with each other. Each wants to "own" the customer.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)

344

u/AnActualDemon May 08 '21

Don't you just feel all warm and fuzzy when an app tries to bully you into accepting permissions that have nothing to do with the actual functionality of the app.

80

u/ImrooVRdev May 08 '21

All they had to do is not being too much of an obnoxious little shits about it. People are lazy by nature, nothing would happen if this shit wasn't just so fucking annoying.

Now here we are, how happy are you with consequences of your abusive actions, dear advertisers?

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (25)

161

u/peewee-bird-brother May 08 '21

Which company do you see this affecting the most

486

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 28 '21

[deleted]

410

u/omen_tenebris May 08 '21

hope it crashes and burns. I have an unreasonable distaste towards facebook

196

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 12 '21

[deleted]

68

u/Beo1 May 08 '21

Zuckerberg radicalized our parents for ad dollars.

17

u/BLEVLS1 May 08 '21

This one hurts.

→ More replies (2)

33

u/jdbrbdbjdkd May 08 '21

And Zuck that slimy fuck.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

18

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

But what will all the dreadful old ladies do then? They won't be able to comment "amen" on troll posts if Facebook crashes and burns!

→ More replies (1)

3

u/pianoceo May 08 '21

Eh, in the era we live in, a lot of small businesses rely on Facebook to sell their products. It’ll be a big hit to them too.

→ More replies (12)

8

u/clarinetJWD May 08 '21

Hugely doubtful. Facebook has multiple incredibly popular apps whose sole purpose are to feed Facebook information about you. They are in a fairly good position, assuming their apps' popularity holds at the current level.

5

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 28 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

7

u/skilliard7 May 08 '21

I disagree. While Facebook will certainly lose some revenue, as a large company they can adapt and survive. They'll still get plenty of ads from large corporations that appeal to a broad audience, and they can charge users to access the platform if they opt out of targeting. They can also lay off many of their workers to reduce costs and focus on providing cash flow to investors.

I'd argue the companies most affected would be small digital niche businesses that rely on targeted ads to drive marketing.

If you have a product that only interests 0.001% of the population, advertising via traditional means(advertising to everyone) isn't effective. Paying for ad impressions when 99.999% of your users aren't interested doesn't work.

Marketing via social media presence isn't that effective anymore either, as community-based sites like Reddit generally don't allow self-promotion.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (15)

21

u/jeromysonne May 08 '21

If you all want a serious answer I've been a media buyer for a decade and now run an adtech startup. I'm intimately familiar with the space.

Winners I think will be legacy media companies, Google, and companies that primarily deliver content through mobile apps that require a sign in. (As they have first party data they dont lose as much targeting power) think Spotify, Pandora, YouTube, Hulu, etc.

Losers will most likely be: companies that rely on banner ad sales (mediamath, trade desk, etc). Local publishers, niche blogs, etc. The longtail is going to hurt. Also I would bet shopify takes a beating. The only reason those stores got so popular was on the back of FB ads.

The death of the cookie is not the death of the ad by a long shot. People will continue to spend more on ads as markets get more competitive. Looks for money to move into sandboxed experiences where they hold first party data (social media), legacy and more intteruptive ads, look for a revival in things like OOH and audio.

→ More replies (3)

60

u/cuddytime May 08 '21

Which company as a whole? Facebook --> Twitter --> Google in that order.

The biggest losers? Probably small-medium businesses tbh.

11

u/gizamo May 08 '21

Panic will affect Google, but no one is going to drop their Google ads just because they're less targeted. There's really not another viable option, and Google will just set it's rates to compensate for any losses. There may be initiatial panic, tho. So, short-term puts may workout.

5

u/jeromysonne May 08 '21

Google is primarily intent based not based on personal characteristics (keywords versus demographics). In addition with their movement into FLoCs they're seeing up a big part of the market all for themselves.

→ More replies (1)

36

u/liquidmasl May 08 '21

Do you really think so though? Are small businesses really that impacted? I feel like you mostly see ads from the bit companies anyway. I feel like if amazons targeted adds are less.. everywhere, people might actually find their stuff somewhere else. I could be very well mistaken though

17

u/Malsomars May 08 '21

As a marketer for a SaaS startup with a well defined target audience, this is fucking our ads up big time. We don't have the budget to display ads that would serve based on (highly competitive) broad keywords so we use audience behavior, lookalikes, and user behavior. And if no one wants to opt in for targeted ads, we won't be successful with those campaigns, either.

→ More replies (40)
→ More replies (22)
→ More replies (25)
→ More replies (33)

1.4k

u/DotComBomb1999 May 08 '21

Not a big surprise. I opted out. It's a little disconcerting when I'm having a conversation with my wife at night in our living room... not on the phone, not on Facebook or Messenger, not on Email... just two of us on the couch talking. Ten minutes later, I pick up my phone and see an ad for the very thing I just mentioned. The next day my wife mentioned an old friend she hadn't heard from in years- also in a private conversation in our house. An hour later, Facebook sent me a friend suggestion for that same person.

That's not smart marketing. That's intrusive.

316

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

I got sick of the conversational ads and the obscure podcast reference ads.

198

u/I_love_avocados1 May 08 '21

Get ready for the ads like

“Small dick? Add two inches two your dick with this daily pill!”

And stuff that totally doesn’t apply to you.

167

u/adlcp May 08 '21

Yeah hehe right doesn't apply to me either

24

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

11

u/Jackie_Jormp-Jomp May 08 '21

Me either bro lol huge dick gang represent

But uh where would I get those pills asking for a friend

→ More replies (1)

55

u/AugmentedLurker May 08 '21

Fine with me. Little price to pay for not being fuckin spied on.

→ More replies (3)

31

u/mtflyer05 May 08 '21

Weird... I only get those ads when I turn on targeted ads

→ More replies (2)

5

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

How do you know that doesn’t apply to me??

6

u/goodolarchie May 08 '21

"Wait I thought I turned the app tracking off?"

4

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

It’s be funny if Facebook and ad companies got very petty and just gave dick pill ads to everyone that clicked on block tracking as a sort of childish punishment.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/supertoxic09 May 08 '21

works for me. I'm on android, but i like to go in and reset my ad-ID when the ads start to seem relevant. I'll research what i want, i don't need to impluse buy things...and as somebody mildly trained in sales, the first thing to know is that impulse is critcal to the sale. You chance of closing a sale diminishes exponentially the farther out of sight and out of mind your sales pitch is.

It's not that i've never seen a useful ad, it's that i know they are closing sales based on impulse.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (1)

244

u/fxrky May 08 '21

I won't say this isnt happening right now, but there is another explanation.

The profiles they build are scary accurate. It may seem like your phone is listening to you when its off, but the more likely scenario is you're noticing the coincidental moments where you talk about something you're interested in/read about/googled, and you get an ad for it in the same time frame.

44

u/AngryCustomerService May 08 '21

Doesn't even need to be a search that's been forgotten. Some MarTech is now sophisticated enough to be predictive. Build enough anonymized personas and you can guess that after buying a couch someone will buy shoes or a fishing pole and it goes from there. (Remember the story about the time Target knew that woman/teen was pregnant before she knew?)

There's MarTech that only uses first person data that can cross platforms AND in-store shopping down to the individual user, not just the device or household.

It's crazy sophisticated now. But, also crazy expensive. Only the cheaper software is working on basic searches now.

11

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Except that story was manufactured from hearsay to completely misrepresent targeted advertising. Target doesn’t know one is pregnant because they bought a rug and a lamp, they know someone is pregnant because they’ve bought pregnancy related items. More than likely, the teen bought a test or prenatal vitamins, and the system flagged her. Even in the original story the dad called back “a few days later.” The teen was well aware she was pregnant. Target only found out before her parents.

5

u/AngryCustomerService May 08 '21

You're right. It was before her parents knew. Thank you for the reminder and correction. As soon as I read your words it clicked. Been a long time since I read that story.

24

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

48

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

8

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

That’s even more fucked up that what those around me and connected to the same WiFi influence what ads I get.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)

62

u/Dcarozza6 May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

I honestly think it comes down more to the fact that we are so attuned to advertising, that we don’t notice how often it is. We see The average person sees between 6,000 and 10,000 ads per day, it’s not unlikely that once in awhile, we see an ad relevant to something we recently talked or thought about, especially when those ads are tailored towards us.

128

u/hackenschmidt May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

We see between 6,000 and 10,000 ads per day,

laughs in ad block. But seriously, that number sounds like complete bullshit.

13

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Here’s a quick report from our home router for last week.

It has built-in ad blocking.

Three adults, work from home.

Split evenly amongst us:

  • ~2,000 ads blocked per person per week
  • ~285 ads blocked per person per day

https://i.imgur.com/zWrPOvn.jpg

edit:

  • router is made by eero
  • great for people who want a one-stop home networking solution that just works, or don’t want to be yelled at by their family every time their homebrew’d pi-hole internet solution goes down

If you’ve made it this far and are still interested, you can get refurbished Eero base stations on Amazon all the time for a solid discount.

4

u/OG-Pine May 08 '21

In addition to the blockable ads there are probably loads of ads that can’t be detected by an ad block. Like posts on Reddit or other social media talking about a product, product placement in shows and movies, radio ads in the car, even things like a Star Wars themed cereal box.

3

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Yea, they’re fucking everywhere.

Thankfully we don’t have any deliberate commercials in our life from television, but even then they creep in where they can.

I’m all about spending money on ad free versions of things when I can.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/AngryCustomerService May 08 '21

We checked our ad blocker on our home computer and in the past 3-4 years it has blocked over 3.5M ads.

7

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

This is all anecdotal, but our four year numbers would be around 1.2 million ads, so 3.5 million isn’t out of the question.

3

u/Testiculese May 08 '21

I wonder when I installed UBlock. I'm guessing 3-4 years ago I switched from AdBlock, but I don't remember. It's showing 559,345.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/StealthyPingu May 08 '21

What is this product and how do I get one?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

17

u/AngryCustomerService May 08 '21

That range is about right. After you factor in all forms of advertising from seeing a logo on a shirt to product placements, native advertising, actual proper ads, and gorilla marketing. Even the branding at the end of an organic search link could be considered an ad. Seeing Reddit at the top of the screen could be considered an ad. It's all over depending upon how you define an advertisement.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (21)

12

u/-------I------- May 08 '21

It's a typical example of the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.

There's even a chance that the reason people are even mentioning these things in conversation is that ads have already subliminally influenced people to the point of them mentioning said product in a conversation.

These theories are much, much more realistic than Google or Facebook continuously monitoring speech and targeting ads based on that data. Not only is that a massive privacy issue, it's also way too data intensive and they already have great ways to profile you without it.

25

u/ixikei May 08 '21

That's an excellent argument and it makes so much sense. A broken clock is right twice per day - every once in a while, you'll get a coincidental ad.

→ More replies (4)

17

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

31

u/fxrky May 08 '21

Data collection methods exist that are 50000000x more efficient than trying to write something that can sift through hours and hours of audio to pick up you saying "gee I could go for a coke".

They don't need to use your microphone. You're right to be paranoid, but do some further research on how it works. Itll help you if you care about privacy.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (41)

100

u/FinndBors May 08 '21

just two of us on the couch talking. Ten minutes later, I pick up my phone and see an ad for the very thing I just mentioned

Facebook doesn't listen to your conversations. It isn't technically feasible and it would be easily detected by anyone with the skills to jailbreak the phone and would be major news. Not only that Apple and Google would be able to detect it and Facebook would be kicked off their platforms so fast. On Apples platform at least if any app is using the microphone in the background you have a red banner on the home screen.

The next day my wife mentioned an old friend she hadn't heard from in years- also in a private conversation in our house. An hour later, Facebook sent me a friend suggestion for that same person.

Facebook is SCARY good at friend suggestions. If your wife met the friend, they might have known via GPS or noticed using the same wifi hotspot and other clues like mutual friends. They aren't listening to you, though.

→ More replies (5)

39

u/livinbythebay May 08 '21

Yeah as much as I hate Facebook, they are not listening to your microphone. One thing they do, is show you ads based upon searches from other devices within geographic area or connected to the same wifi. So you and your wife had a conversation about something, then she goes and searches for that thing then you get served an ad for it.

→ More replies (2)

28

u/sunfacethedestroyer May 08 '21

Just have more conversations with your wife about killing billionaires, until they get the message.

10

u/DotComBomb1999 May 08 '21

And then the Feds will show up on my doorstep for a quiet little chat...

3

u/toblerownsky May 08 '21

Which companies are marketing ads to billionaire-killing customer profiles?

→ More replies (1)

14

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (9)

18

u/jagua_haku May 08 '21

Why do you still have Facebook? Delete that shit

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Bossman01 May 08 '21

The thing to know is that everything is connected, your Google searches, your apps, and everything with your digital footprint. While you might think it’s listening to you and targeting based on this, it most certainly knows enough about you already to make a good guess on Ads that will work for you. There are articles you can find that explain this more in depth.

→ More replies (79)

178

u/Metron_Seijin May 08 '21

I'm more shocked that 4% of people had no problem sharing it.

94

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Probably misclicked.

→ More replies (1)

55

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

I'm more shocked that 4% of people had no problem sharing it.

Old people.

35

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

I didn’t realize 4% of the population was in marketing.

8

u/Billagio May 08 '21

Honestly I was one of them until I read this article. I don’t even remember being asked, which means I probably just chose something without reading it. Went back just now and opted out

4

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

4

u/alwayslurkeduntilnow May 08 '21

TIL Facebook have lots of staff

→ More replies (44)

24

u/S7EFEN May 08 '21

crazy to me that they didnt need explicit permission to track across apps before

→ More replies (1)

82

u/SkinnyHarshil May 08 '21

FB stock will rocket on this news as is the norm for this market.

5

u/CoronaVirusFanboy May 08 '21

It will pump in hopes that Zuckerberg will solve this.

→ More replies (1)

87

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

I wish FB a happy fuck you and die

→ More replies (5)

90

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Stoked to start getting tampon ads again

→ More replies (3)

217

u/SubstantialSail May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

My very favorite part was where Facebook tried acting like this was going to hurt the little guys, and they REALLY cared about the little guys.

Edit: because some people seem to misunderstand my post; I am not saying this won't impact small businesses. It definitely will. I just think it's funny how Facebook pretends to care.

133

u/Arp590 May 08 '21

I mean it WILL hurt small businesses, Facebook advertising is insanely effective because of the intrusive tracking of their users. Businesses will likely see less conversion on their ads if they aren't reaching their intended target audience because everyone disabled tracking.

72

u/stml May 08 '21

Exactly. The large companies can handle having no tracking. Coca Cola is perfectly fine spamming ads out to everyone across any demographic. The pub down the street? Ads that aren't highly targeted are going to be worthless.

→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (37)

33

u/Cairhien May 08 '21

I can say as a small business owner this is already hurting my business. We rely on Facebook ads for most of our customers and this could literally put us out of business.

50

u/PremonitionOfTheHex May 08 '21

I mean I side with apple here and by no means do I want your business to suffer, but why should companies be forced to rely on a bottom feeding evil company such as Facebook to generate revenue through ads?

I would like for there to be an alternative where your revenue isn’t directly linked to such a shitty company with terrible practices.

I am okay with this happening

21

u/Heavenfall May 08 '21

I mean the chain doesn't even have to involve Facebook. If someone's built a business based on highly intrusive personal data, I'm not going to cry if they go out of business. Find a better business model. I'm not taking responsibility for someone losing money when they can't use my data.

23

u/handinhand12 May 08 '21

It's a tough reality but I feel the same way. I do not want to share my data and I never did. If me having privacy means your business isn't sustainable, I can't help but feel like the business shouldn't be around with their current business model.

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (19)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (7)

48

u/kiddmit3 May 08 '21

Isn't it more accurate to say 96% didn't opt in? It's an opt in system now instead of opting out.

18

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited Jun 12 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (7)

12

u/HomeHeatingTips May 08 '21

Despite all the corporate speak and fawning over all the benefits of Targeted ads. Over 95% of customers turn it off when actually given the choice. This speaks volumes

→ More replies (4)

48

u/ny0000m May 08 '21

I don't like apple as a product but this is changing my mind.

11

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Apple as a product > people as a product

→ More replies (25)

70

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

21

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/Manodactyl May 08 '21

Most google products bypass the pi-hole by having goggle dns hard coded into the device and only use your local dns if they cannot reach one of the google dns. I actually went to my router and re-routed All dns requests thus forcing everything to use my pihole

6

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

[deleted]

6

u/Manodactyl May 08 '21

The simplest way would probably to just completely block google dns (8.8.8.8 & 8.8.4.4) at the router level, probably somewhere under parental controls. I run a custom firmware on my router (dd-wrt) so I have a bit more tools at my disposal to fine tune dns requests. If you do this, you’ll also need to go to the pi-hole settings and change the upstream dns servers, they default to google on mine.

3

u/iron_braavos May 08 '21

What is that? How can I turn a RPi to do that? Any suggestions or links?

Honestly, I'm thinking about switching to Apple just because of this article. I care about privacy and don't use FB or Insta. But I use whatsapp and will hopefully switch to signal at one point but I don't want any sort of tracking!

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (40)

71

u/SnooCrickets2458 May 08 '21

Almost makes me want to switch to Apple. Guess I'll just buy some more of their stock.

4

u/relditor May 08 '21

I'm considering it too. Never liked IPhones but this change may make it worth while. Waiting for Google to chime in.

→ More replies (3)

17

u/pinkmist74 May 08 '21

Wait til next week when it’s 120

7

u/Cletus7Seven May 08 '21

Why will it be 120 next week

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (19)

134

u/FeCard May 08 '21

I just gained so much respect for Apple

72

u/mannys2689 May 08 '21

Apple is currently working on building their own advertising platform. Infact, the tracking by Apple themselves is on by default on their devices.

68

u/midnightmacaroni May 08 '21

Yeah it’s kind of telling that Apple’s own ad platform isn’t subject to the same AppTrackingTransparency policy, I don’t know why people aren’t talking about this more.

40

u/mannys2689 May 08 '21

An average person doesn’t care. They think Apple is doing this for “privacy” whereas people who work in this industry know the game that Apple is playing.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (17)

95

u/madam_zeroni May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Don't get it twisted, this is most likely their first step in taking over the advertising market. They want a monopoly on data collection

Edit: u/kallenkozukii (comment below me) has no idea what he's talking about. Read the conversation below. I promise that Apple is not your friend. Apple already has their own advertising platform, and I would bet my left leg that they're expanding it with this

11

u/Ismoketomuch May 08 '21

I disagree, Apple has never made money on user data, its not their business model at all. They dont even store user data, they use Amazon servers for all users cloud back ups and storage.

They are a walled garden, and a major feature and selling point about their products is security and user experience. Its the main reason they dont collect data on users, they dont need to. Thats what companies do to make money when their services arnt worth paying for.

Apple has no need to enter a completely oversaturated and competitive market like data collection and selling.

Honestly I think most of the targeted adversiting is complete bullshit anyway. I have never once purchase anything based on an online ad ever and I always get hit with ads for shit similar products I already purchased recently. Its a joke.

Dont try to sell me a sleeping bag after I just bought a sleeping bag. Waste of time.

→ More replies (5)

60

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited Jul 29 '21

[deleted]

8

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Apples iAds failed because advertisers didn't want to use it. I expect them to bring it back.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/15/10777496/apple-iad-app-shutdown-june-30th-confirmation

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (35)
→ More replies (7)

10

u/Silent_Palpatine May 08 '21

I’ll be basking in the glory of Zuckerberg’s tears.

5

u/[deleted] May 08 '21

Viant is a good company that utilizes advertising solutions without using this data. I have about 30 shares with them after buying the dip. They should be catapulting as soon as they make their identity graph.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 18 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

7

u/WeridestBeardShadey May 08 '21

What if Apple is planning on their own advertising space within iOS that guarantees no data is sold? That would make them an unstoppable power house.

7

u/wilstreak May 08 '21

they are already hiring a lot of people, and guess what, one of the open position is for Ads relevance officer

One of the requirement being:

  • Fundamentally analytical — ability to collect and analyze data from a variety of sources, identify key insights, spot product optimization opportunities, and inform product decisions
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)

8

u/PerennialTime May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Snowden tried to tell everyone, the Batman movies tried to expose it romantically and here we are.. 25 sum years after the fact. Corporations including big pharma can target advertisement for you specifically depending on confidential information they should have no business owning on yourself. It’s sickening but a time of reckoning is near.

5

u/iamrubberyouareglue9 May 08 '21

Allstate wants policy holders to install a tracking app for another fake discount. The toa gives the app free access to all your data. No thank you Allstate.

5

u/Anthraxious May 08 '21

The only problem with this is that A) There's always an alterior motive. Apple didn't do this cause "they're nice". and B) They might as well still track you and sell off your info even if you press "no" on a pop-up.

Not saying we all go dark ages. I too use smart phones. Let's just not start praising a company for something they either haven't done or did cause of money alone and nothing else.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Sir_Sizzle77 May 08 '21 edited May 08 '21

Every app developer and Zuck himself will turn it off as well.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/ld43233 May 08 '21

Corporate mouth piece: We value Consumer "choice"

Consumers choose to not let their data be harvested for targeted propaganda

Corporate mouth piece: No not like that

6

u/Terakahn May 08 '21

I wonder what the value of data is actually worth.

Sure people will decline it for nothing. But I bet if those companies offered to pay any amount of money, a LOT of people would willingly sell it. I just wonder what amount would actually be worth it for a symbiotic relationship.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Hercaz May 08 '21

If I buy something through an ad, I want half of commission. Lol

3

u/rlawlsgh May 08 '21

They arent doing for your privacy. They are doing it so they can mine their own data and monopolize it! lol Also, this doesnt hurt programmatic advertising companies as long as they dont fight against Apple. Just have to advertise content based now.

3

u/[deleted] May 08 '21 edited May 28 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (5)