Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:55AM   Printer-friendly
from the good-riddance dept.

Advertising as we’ve always known it — large-scale campaigns predicated on instilling subconscious intuition in consumers — will die. What will rise from its ashes [will] be unlike anything we’ve seen before. It will not condition us to select from a menu of mediocrity, as it has done for centuries. Rather, the algorithms buried within the walls of companies like Google and Facebook will deterministically present us with our best options for everything from dinner to marriage, given the troves of user data they have at their disposal. At first, consumers may rebel, like they did with the advent of GPS in cars, or online shopping [4]. But as they realize that they are better served by allowing algorithms to take care of the decisions they once relied on their own autonomy to make, they will make the shift. It will not happen overnight, but it will happen.

This new world will be marked by a monumental shift away from branding, which is already happening, a shift away from search, which is about to happen, but most important, and perhaps most unsettling, a shift away from trust in the user as the final indicator of their own desire. As we make this shift, and move towards a world in which data — and the mastery of its use — is king, ads will become deterministic. The companies that define this future will master the use of consumer data to inform ad delivery, and as they continue to amass user data, both their advertisements — and in turn, their data — will improve in tandem, until both are perfect. As this happens — and it will be a process, given that new consumers enter the world by the hundreds of thousands every day — our world will become one in which every consumer will be deterministically paired both with what they want, and what they need. In this new world, whether there will even be a difference is far from clear.

"every consumer will be deterministically paired both with what they want, and what they need."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @01:42PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @01:42PM (#485878)

    I am sure they have their thought-crime and meta data analysis to try to stop such things.

    I mean, our ISPs in the USA are now permitted to openly snoop on anything coming in through their service. Theyr'e allowed to decrypt SSL certs inject advertisements and read the headers and content and email and DNS requests and... everything.

    It won't just be ads, and it won't be to the highest bidder. It will be to anyone that wants to buy it and it won't be to just one corporation or FBI request.

    What they are doing used to require a warrant, and now this is under the pretense of advertising! Sure, we'll get that, but the profile isn't going to only get sold to some advertisers. It's what the government has wanted for a long time now, and now it's completely legal. Who needs a wiretap when the entire content can be recorded and read for 'advertising' purposes?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:13PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 29 2017, @07:13PM (#486107)

    I mean, our ISPs in the USA are now permitted to openly snoop on anything coming in through their service. Theyr'e allowed to decrypt SSL certs inject advertisements and read the headers and content and email and DNS requests and... everything.

    Indeed. I just wonder how long it will take before these Congress critters discover that their own browsing history, email, et al are up for grabs right along with everyone else's. In fact, I just wonder how long it will take before some enterprising shit stirrer decides that it would be fun to publicise the internet browsing habits of members of Congress. How many members of the GOP caucus do you suppose have been regulars on sites like ashleymadison.com? How many members of the Trump family? How many members of the GOP caucus do you suppose have been browsing for gay porn? I have no idea what are the answers to these questions but I have no doubt the affected persons will protest "B-b-but that's not fair!!!" And I'm certain that the answers will be funny, amazing, and disappointing, all at the same time. Get set for another wild ride.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by J053 on Wednesday March 29 2017, @10:50PM

      by J053 (3532) <dakineNO@SPAMshangri-la.cx> on Wednesday March 29 2017, @10:50PM (#486228) Homepage
      From the green site:

      Now call it a poetic justice, online privacy activist Adam McElhaney has launched an initiative called Search Internet History, with an objective of raising funds to buy browsing history of each politician and official who voted in favor of S.J.Res 34.