If you value privacy on Social media?

[Zelig]

Gmail has never given me decent adverts. Google ads are usually better. E.g. the ad on the top of CFC right now is pretty good... It's an ad for cheap overseas money transfer, which is useful to me because I send a lot of money to relatives in Guyana and the USA.

I'm still skeptical. If I want to spend money on something, I'm going to Google it and research the best/cheapest option, I don't see how ads on cfc are going to have any impact on my choice.

 

[Mise]

I very often don't know that product X exists, or that there are websites where I can do thing Y, or that person Z has released a new album/book/film. Sometimes I don't know that I want something until I see it advertised to me.

A relevant example: I spent most of my evening trying to set up a VNC server on my phone so I could connect to it via my PC. But I wouldn't have even been aware of the possibility of doing that if a company called "GoToMyPC" hadn't aggressively advertised itself on my google ads about a year and a half ago. At the time I had no use for it; I just thought, "huh, that's kind of neat, but I can't imagine ever wanting to do that," and spent a few minutes on google investigating it further. Fast forward 18 months and I connected the dots: wouldn't it be cool to see my phone on my PC, and use my mouse and keyboard on it, since I don't have the internet installed in my new flat yet? I know! I'll use a VNC server!

Anyway, I'm sure I could have found that out some other way. Maybe I could have learnt it from a casual comment on a forum, or a TV program, or a lifehacker article. But I didn't - I learnt it from an ad. I've learnt about a lot of cool things from adverts - things I didn't realise I could do, products and services I didn't realise I could buy, before looking at the ad.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Which you can learn about just as well if you frequently read articles on certain sites.

 

[Mise]

As I said, I could have, but I didn't. I could spend all my time reading wikipedia to learn about every single possible thing in the known universe, but I don't, because that's boring as hell. I don't read computer magazines and this is pretty much the only place in the world where I actually discuss computer-related topics on a regular basis. If I wanted to, I could spend all my time reading computer magazines and know all there is to know about computers. But I don't, so the advert was useful to me.

And even if I did read computer magazines or go on geeky forums, and so knew about VNC servers before seeing the ad, what's the harm in having an advert for a VNC product? That is clearly something I'm interested in! I needed one the other day, so it would have been entirely relevant and incredibly useful to have an advert for that exact product at that exact time. It would have been great - I wouldn't have scratched my head for so long thinking of a way to make this work.

I just don't see where the problem is. Why wouldn't I want an advert for a VNC product, right at the time when I need a VNC product?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Because there are less intrusive ways to find out about it.

And really, until you've had a migraine triggerred by a flashing banner ad, you probably wouldn't understand why someone would want to block them.

 

[Mise]

I wouldn't have even known that VNC was a possibility had it not been for the ad...... How am I suppsed to find out about something when I don't even know what it is that I'm finding out about? How can I google "VNC server" if I don't know that a VNC server even exists? What am I supposed to do, just read about every single product that has ever existed on the off-chance that one day I might have a use for one of them? That sounds a million times more frustrating and annoying than an advert for something I actually want and need. I don't see how a small ad that's easy to scroll past is more intrusive than having to spend all my time reading about products that I don't even need. The irony of telling me to read about products that I don't even need, as a solution for adverts for things that I don't even need...

And no, I don't get flashing banner adverts. Maybe once in 5 or 6 months?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

For some reason the advertising servers decided I liked flashing ads and started serving them up every second page. Which was when I got AdBlock.

If you search for "use a computer remotely" you get ... huh, look at this ... third result:
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-VNC-Virtual-Network-Computing-to-Control-a-Computer-Remotely

 

[Mise]

aimee... I didn't even know that you could use a computer remotely before the advert popped up. It's just not something I would have ever thought of doing, before I saw the ad for it... I would never have googled "use a computer remotely", because that's not something that I would ever have thought about doing. I wouldn't google "use a banjo as a floatation device" either, because I'm pretty sure that banjos would make poor floatation devices. But if I saw an example of someone using a banjo as a floatation device, whether in an advert, on TV or in a magazine, then maybe, if I had a banjo and needed a floatation device, I'd put two and two together and google "use a banjo as a floatation device".

This isn't a difficult concept.

 

[IglooDame]

Just thought I'd drop this vaguely useful news story into the discussion:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/01/google_ads_gmail/

Google has begun telling users of its Gmail service exactly why it is serving up specific ads that creepily refer to the content detailed in individual email correspondence.

"Our advertising system is designed to show the right ad to the right person at the right time," said the world's largest ad broker in a blog post penned by the company's advertising veep Susan Wojcicki yesterday.

"Over the coming weeks, we’re making improvements to provide greater transparency and choice regarding the ads you see on Google search and Gmail. Soon, you’ll be able to learn more about these ads by clicking the 'Why these ads' link next to ads on Google search results and Gmail."

There's a little more to it than that, however. The new feature will also allow Gmailers to see information about search ad targeting as well as opt out of being fed ads from certain advertisers.

Google added so-called "personalised ads" to its Gmail service in early 2010.

Since then, the company is now subject to regular privacy audits under the supervision of the Federal Trade Commission in the US after Google's epic fail with the stealth bolt-on of Buzz to Gmail.

More generally, regulators in Europe and the US are increasingly gently poking internet businesses to be more transparent about how they serve up targeted ads.

No wonder then that Google wants to be seen to be doing the right thing by adding the "Why these ads" functionality to Gmail.

 

[innonimatu]

aimee... I didn't even know that you could use a computer remotely before the advert popped up. It's just not something I would have ever thought of doing, before I saw the ad for it... I would never have googled "use a computer remotely", because that's not something that I would ever have thought about doing. I wouldn't google "use a banjo as a floatation device" either, because I'm pretty sure that banjos would make poor floatation devices. But if I saw an example of someone using a banjo as a floatation device, whether in an advert, on TV or in a magazine, then maybe, if I had a banjo and needed a floatation device, I'd put two and two together and google "use a banjo as a floatation device".

Congratulations, you're the perfect marketing victim. I mean, you admit that you don't need something (never though of using a computer remotely), but you saw an add about an old and rather inferior way to doing it and now you are a fan?

About Google: I didn't know about that level of shamelessness with targeted adds based on email content, but I'm not surprised. Years ago I ceased even answer mails from people using gmail accounts. Which also turned out to be a good way to filter out the useless correspondence: anyone important I must trade mails with should have institutional mail accounts.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

About Google: I didn't know about that level of shamelessness with targeted adds based on email content, but I'm not surprised. Years ago I ceased even answer mails from people using gmail accounts. Which also turned out to be a good way to filter out the useless correspondence: anyone important I must trade mails with should have institutional mail accounts.

Not all of us are so lucky. My current school doesnt offer email, I dont have a job, my site is defunct so I can't use that one, and the ISP email I set up for myselfl doesn't even work

 

[Zelig]

Congratulations, you're the perfect marketing victim. I mean, you admit that you don't need something (never though of using a computer remotely), but you saw an add about an old and rather inferior way to doing it and now you are a fan?

About Google: I didn't know about that level of shamelessness with targeted adds based on email content, but I'm not surprised. Years ago I ceased even answer mails from people using gmail accounts. Which also turned out to be a good way to filter out the useless correspondence: anyone important I must trade mails with should have institutional mail accounts.

Institutional mail accounts tend to suck, I forward all of mine to gmail anyway.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I thought this would be of interrerst to the discusin.

http://www.takethislollipop.com/

I couldnt do it because I dont got a Facebook but I googled what it does.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

That doesn't even make sense.

People who decry Facebook are those who do not have the "normal" social life that its millions and millions of users have, and find it an almost essential part of daily life.

Most people who decry Facebook are Facebook users and many people use Facebook in lieu of actually being social in RL. You really think Facebook has gone through so much trouble because of a hand full of loners who wouldn't use their service in the first place? The problem is an increasing amount of ordinary people have become more informed and concerned and that makes them vulnerable to future competition.

So are you going to buy everything in life with cash, never use a mobile phone, never walk the streets in case there are cameras? To assume your life isn't constantly monitored seems foolish to me.

No, but I am going to try to discourage organizations from engaging in this type of behavior. To an extent it has helped as now companies at least have to pretend to respect and secure private information.

I am happy to trade whatever pretence of privacy my internet use may have for the convenience of Facebook. This works both ways as I find facebook very useful, and I do not consider the information it takes as costly to me.

You might be happy with it, but your happiness and complacency helped create an environment where identity theft and financial fraud thrive. I'm sure you draw the line somewhere, but even accepting Facebook's activities opens up security threats and bad patterns of behavior that cause more serious problems.