1371
Google Chrome pushes ahead with targeted ads based on your browser history
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
1371 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
60052 readers
2860 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/wqn3gR1WTcA?si=GBKBNrQ-x0QKvwBh&
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
If someone is swayed by a political advertisement, they are, by definition, consuming content they desire.
Goal should be to change what those people desire rather than fight against them consuming ads/media.
That’s a bad argument. Marketing is one thing, manipulation is totally different.
There’s nothing specifically wrong with marketing in general, but marketers with access to enormous amounts of private information blur the line between advertising and manipulation. Using people’s private information to each individual exactly what they want to hear about a candidate without regard to the truth is absolutely something that we should be concerned about.
If you can be manipulated by a targeted ad you were already into that.
No normal person stumbles across Andrew Tate on YouTube due to an algorithm and thinks, "This man is my savior."
You’ve got a naive definition of ‘normal’.
I’d say that the vast majority of people who stumble across a curated Andrew Tate clip and think that the very carefully selected soundbite resonates with them are “normal.”
That’s the issue with deeply personalized targeted marketing. People get presented with a representation of something that isn’t accurate. Instead, it’s tightly tailored to be agreeable, which can result in “normal” people forming positive sentiments towards things that they’d absolutely disagree with if they were presented with a truthful representation.
No man I'd say you are the one with the skewed definition of "normal"
I know 0 people who would buy into that dudes horseshit
Perhaps to a perfectly rational being, but I don't happen to know any of those myself.
I mean that's specifically what this is about, yeah?