> 1. I don't want to buy another Sony XM3 headphones. I just fucking bought them and I am seeing more ads of the same thing.
To be a devil's advocate, doesn't that mean that advertisers should get MORE of your personal data, so they know every product you own and won't suggest you buy something you already have?
Whenever you see a bad ad, it means whatever privacy precautions you're taking are working. The advertiser would love to not spend money advertising their thingie to someone that already has it. But you didn't let them. That sounds like a success to me.
That's kind of true but that's only because adtech is siloed. Let's say you're identified by Facebook as having an interest in the Sony headphones. User clicks an ad and heads over to Amazon to purchase. The purchase is made and Amazon knows the conversion happened but Facebook does not.
Facebook does purchase credit card usage information but it's not nearly as perfect as having a conversion pixel on the site.
Future laws should really focus on cross-site / app tracking and the legality of purchasing third-party data.
A big part of the article is about how all the middle men want to spend more money, not less. For all the "tech" in AdTech, it's surprising how much gets canceled because it increased efficiency and made revenue go down. Even efforts to align incentives end to end like CPA (cost per action/conversion) don't do well for the same reasons.
To be a devil's advocate, doesn't that mean that advertisers should get MORE of your personal data, so they know every product you own and won't suggest you buy something you already have?
Whenever you see a bad ad, it means whatever privacy precautions you're taking are working. The advertiser would love to not spend money advertising their thingie to someone that already has it. But you didn't let them. That sounds like a success to me.