SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the this-article-brought-to-you-by-Cambridge-Analytica:-the-tastemakers dept.
Is it worse to be distracted by irrelevant ads, or to be monitored closely enough that the ads are accurate but creepy? Why choose? [...] One company called Cambridge Analytica has managed to apply what some are calling a "weaponized AI propaganda machine" in order to visit both fates upon us at once. And it's all made possible by Facebook.
Cambridge Analytica specializes in the mass manipulation of thought. One way they accomplish this is through social media, particularly by deploying "native advertising." Otherwise known as sponsored content, these are ads designed to fool you into assimilating the ad unchallenged. The company also uses Facebook as a platform to push microtargeted posts to specific audiences, looking for the tipping point where someone's political inclination can be changed, just a little bit, for the right price. Much like Facebook games designed specifically for their addictive potential, rather than for any entertainment value, these intellectual salesmen exist solely to hit every sub-perceptual lever in order to bypass our conscious barriers.
[...] Microtargeting [is] the idea that Alice the Advertiser can accurately change the mind of Bob the Buyer based on information Alice can buy. The notion of microtargeting is not itself new, but what Cambridge Analytica is doing with it is novel. They're using the Facebook ecosystem because it perfectly enables the goal of targeting individuals and using their longer-lasting personality characteristics like a psychological GPS. It all hinges on a Facebook advertising tool called "unpublished posts." Among advertisers, these are simply called dark posts.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday March 02 2017, @05:44AM
(Score: 2) by Bogsnoticus on Thursday March 02 2017, @05:46AM (13 children)
The me posting from this device, or the me browsing from my work laptop which doesn't browse the same sites and uses a different VPN, or the me browsing from home on another vpn?
Different hardware, software, and browsing profiles, and ne'er the twain shall meet.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:15AM (11 children)
I've found that advertisers are really good at trying to sell me things I've already bought. Well, when I'm browsing without adblockers.
Seems to me like the advertising is getting less and less effective over time. The most effective it ever was was back in the past when they were simple text ads that were targeted to the content of the page. They knew that I was looking for something related to the page, so they could target that effectively. The modern smart ads are mostly ineffective as in most cases I've already bought the things that they're trying to sell me by the time they target the ads.
The next most effective thing is mailing lists covering topics I'm interested in.
I'm not going to buy another one of something just because they're pitching the ads to me.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:43AM
I have seen ads reminding me that I looked at certain products on certain sites.
However the ad does not work if I was just trying to check what was available (+ price ballpark), and decided not buy (or decided to buy a cheaper substitutes).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:54AM (9 children)
Ads don't really work, people have been conditioned to blend them out and not notice them --- that's why they've gotten more and more in your face, which now has the opposite effect of making all the the dumbest people angry (maybe the intent, but still not a good way to sell you a product).
(Score: 2) by http on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:05AM (8 children)
With apologies to Hamburger Hill, you are mistaken.
"Ads don't really work." Can you hook me up with your dealer, please?
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:14AM (4 children)
Marketers have particularly evil psychologists working with them, not particularly dumb ones. They are much, much smarter than you and I put together.
Psychologists are largely quacks. Even if these ones aren't, how do you know how intelligent they are? Do you have a way of accurately measuring someone's level of intelligence? Have you used your secret method to measure the intelligence of the psychologists, the person you're replying to, and yourself?
Plus, they're explicitly trained to get messages across without you noticing what they are.
It's like telling someone to prove that god does not exist. How can you possibly prove that you're not being influenced by the evil brainwashing rays? What if some people - or even many people - are influenced but others aren't? How can you say that I, specifically, am one of the people who are affected? The problem I have with a lot of these assertions is that they're absolutist.
Finally, There's a half trillion dollars spent every year to motivate them.
Just throwing money at something isn't scientific evidence that it works. There are too many factors to reach such a conclusion.
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:41PM
ok. I accept your argument.
but... sex sells.
I don't need a psychologist for that... just breasts! and it has already been proven that they have evil brainwashing rays emanating out of them. How can you possibly not be influenced by them? They are both evil AND wholesome, the whole family will love them AND they can be used to help start one!
And based on my relationships, a half trillion dollars spent every year to motivate them seems about right. I mean, I'll do it for free, I'm already motivated by them!
Without the investment, I otherwise am just vulnerable to swiping left or right based on what the marketing has decided which sizes and types are best for me, and they learn even more with each swipe!
(And if you don't believe me, look at how those ridiculous story-book games on steam about anime/manga life simulators are in the top sellers... it doesn't take a psychologist to figure what sells to many young men)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:42PM (2 children)
Let me demonstrate what they are talking about.
I place in front of you to glasses of cola
One is coca-cola and the other is the generic store brand.
Which one do you want more? They are both equally bad for you and tasty. Yet mostly people will grab for the name brand. That is the subtle message that advertisers are selling you. Coca-cola the drink is not a particularly better than any other cola. However, the brand? That is huge. We do not see it because it is always there.
Still do not think so? Check out this classic scene in a popular movie. Watch the framing of the cola cans. They are almost always making sure the logo shows during this conversation. THIS IS A COKE commercial in the middle of a movie.
https://youtu.be/TGtSCG9pQ3g?t=2m8s [youtu.be]
Here is a more blatant one. Right in the middle of a tense scene in a movie the main character cracks open a cool one in front of a pepsi display. Pepsi/Coors commercial in the middle of a movie. He made sure the logo showed. You can see him do it.
https://youtu.be/AxG0k1e2TTE?t=1m43s [youtu.be]
One more. This particular one is an 'easter egg'. The bench he hops over is a failed paid for advertisement. They did not get paid to put it in but they had already made the set and filmed it so they left it in. Nice quick California raisins commercial.
https://youtu.be/AM5EYO5wWMA?t=2m40s [youtu.be]
They work very hard to make their stuff subtle and just 'there'. But once and awhile it pokes out and does something odd. This sort of stuff is prevalent throughout all of our media. That does included the internet. They have been doing this since before we were born. They know how it works.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03 2017, @07:58AM
Let me demonstrate what they are talking about.
I know what they're talking about, but the evidence of its efficacy is hardly convincing if you have actual standards. And again, even if it is effective, that doesn't prove it's effective on absolutely everyone, and yet many people still claim that specific individuals they are talking to are affected even when they have no evidence that that is the case.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Friday March 03 2017, @12:18PM
Three answers:
1) If they taste the same they are the same (out of the fifty or so colas I've tried so far no two has tasted the same) and I'll pick whatever is likely to have been mucked around with the least (ie: non-relabelled coca cola)
2) If there is Coca Cola vs Generic Store I'd pick the generic store - Coca Cola can't do a decent carbonation to save their company (I actively avoid Coca Cola due to taste and carbonation)
3) If there is Coca Cola vs Pepsi I'd take the Coca Cola - not due to brand but rather due to Pepsi being sickeningly sweet.
And possibly a fourth - if I'd get my choice of cola I would pick Fentimans, X-treme, Jolt Cola, Volt Cola, Boylan's Sugar Cane Cola or Nygårda Cola. Quite frankly Coca Cola is the third worst "standard" cola I've tried (second is pepsi, first actually is a generic store brand - but in general those are better)
The point I'm trying to make is that brand only matters if you care about perception, are uninformed, prefer the bog standard, or if the options differ less than what you care about
(Score: 4, Insightful) by lx on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:40AM
Marketers also have a knack for promoting their own snake oil.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:04AM
https://techcrunch.com/2009/03/22/why-advertising-is-failing-on-the-internet/ [techcrunch.com]
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday March 02 2017, @07:40PM
I dunno man, I've gotta agree with him on that one. For me they generally just give a 404 error ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @02:54PM
For a while there on YouTube I kept seeing regular ads for products to help me stop smoking. I've never smoked in my life. I browse mostly from the desktop, and I run Ghostery on all my browsers, so my ad-blocking and anti-tracking efforts are only half-assed at best, but this is Google thinking I'm an active smoker! I don't have a FB account, but I do have a GMail account.
I've always been very skeptical of the "they know you're pregnant even before you do" stories. It seems a multi-billion dollar industry has been built up upon that one anecdotal case (Walmart, wasn't it? Or Target?). The grand successes of Big Data, at least for advertising purposes, I think are assumed as fact and I wonder how much it would hold up under real scrutiny. Big generalizations of course work (someone constantly posting about their new baby would be more inclined to purchase baby-related products), but I can't help but think this microtargeting stuff is mostly hype.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by julian on Thursday March 02 2017, @05:56AM (6 children)
I'll never know, because I'll never see the ads. I'd still prefer they not track me, however.
These articles just underscore my position; that blockings ads and ad-tracking--and encouraging others to do so--is an ethical imperative. This sort of privacy-invading behavior is inevitable because it's built into the incentive structures of the system. It's irreparably unethical and we're better off without it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:58AM (1 child)
> I'll never know, because I'll never see the ads.
Don't fool yourself.
Just because it doesn't identify itself as an ad doesn't mean it isn't an ad.
You've heard of product placement, well it happens in online content all the time too.
Articles can include paid-for links to sites to drive traffic and other than being super paranoid you've got no way of knowing if an author that just happens to mention some site finds it legitimately useful or if they are getting kickbacks.
(Score: 2) by Webweasel on Thursday March 02 2017, @11:22AM
Yup.
I stopped watching the Soprano's when I noticed how much Diet Coke they drank.
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Thursday March 02 2017, @11:14AM
I make it a point never to click on ads, but I also never see any. Next to uBlock I'm using uMatrix, Cookies Exterminator and Decentraleyes to combat the tracking. And I'm still disgusted when I realize that Google appears to know what I searched for on my pc, when I'm using my phone.
(Score: 1) by Sourcery42 on Thursday March 02 2017, @05:27PM (2 children)
I do what I can to minimize my footprint. Primary browser on my laptop is Firefox with ublock, no-script, privacy badger, etc. I have chromium with a slightly less restrictive setup for sites I must use that that Firefox setup breaks. I use a chromium based browser with some extra tracking protection and content filtering baked in on my phone. I always search with duckduckgo, and only use google as a last resort.
Also a snippet from a custom blacklist I put in /etc/hosts on every device I use. Nothing of value is blocked.
127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 www.login.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 edgw-star6-shv-02-ams2.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 facebook.com
127.0.0.1 connect.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 apps.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 login.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 www.connect.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 static.ak.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 fbcdn.com
127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.com
127.0.0.1 ssl.google-analytics.com
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday March 02 2017, @07:57PM (1 child)
I'd say you need to expand you hosts file...like, a LOT.
I use a pfSense hardware firewall with pfBlocker-NG plugin to get the same general result. But I like to take a domain and plug it into this site to get a list of known related subdomains and make sure I nuke those too:
http://dnsdumpster.com/ [dnsdumpster.com]
I go a bit further than that even as I'm beyond fed up with the Internet becoming Google/Facebook's private playground. I don't want them tracking me, I don't want anyone bypassing a DNS block by hardcoding an IP, I don't want them indexing my servers, I don't want them utilizing my network resources in any way. So after I get that list of domains and subdomains, I query each in a few dozen nameservers all around the world to make sure I'm blocking more than just the local datacenter. I'm sure I'm not getting EVERYTHING...at least not yet...but I feel like I'm doing my best at least. :)
(Score: 2, Informative) by Sourcery42 on Friday March 03 2017, @03:49PM
I said snippet. Didn't think anyone would appreciate posting the 2 mb version, and certainly not the 26 mb version.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:29AM
I loathe these adverts companies keep tryng to force on me.
if these systems knew what I would do to these advertisers. they wouldn't be trying to feed me adverts.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:43AM
Joke's on them, I can't afford any of it :)
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:56AM (10 children)
Their whole ability to do the shit they do is based on having a FaceBook profile: from the things you post on your FB profile, the people you have in your circle of friends, the stuff you "Like" via that damned social media widget embedded in what seems like every damn site on the web.
The widget allows them to know nearly everything you do on the site containing the widget that you visit, the posts you make to that site, & where you came from (referrer) & where you went (the link off page you clicked to leave).
It all falls flat if you don't have a FB account (I don't), don't let FB set any cookies (I don't), have FB included in your HOSTS file (I do) so your computer refuses to talk to them at all, & have your browser's security settings so locked down tight it makes a locked chastity belt look like a drive through lane with a welcome mat.
They *might* be able to track me by the virtual black hole I leave in my wake, the fact that there was a visitor to $Site that did *NOT* have any FB cookie capabilities is in itself an identifier, but then that "uniqueness" means "my" trail gets lumped in with any/everyone else whom values their privacy enough to do similar tactics.
Dear psychometric data collecting & political influence peddling companies, Fuck Off. I am not for sale. Signed, a paranoid skeptic realist that refuses to swallow the bait you're dangling.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Farkus888 on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:16AM (4 children)
Browser fingerprinting. They are still tracking you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:29AM (3 children)
How do they fingerprint your browser when your browser never even connects to them?
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Thursday March 02 2017, @12:15PM (2 children)
Every page that serves up an image of that nasty little thumb off of Facebook's own servers takes care of that. The image, being fetched from Facebook, gives them all the info they need to make a fingerprint and follow that fingerprint around the web as various pages, all carrying that nasty little thumb, check in with Facebook while bearing the same fingerprint.
Your only option is to block them at the firewall, either on your desktop or notebook or on the router. Preferably block both. However, be advised that to get them all, you will have to block a shitload of networks, around 75 in all.
Then feed that into iptables or PF, the former for GNU/Linux distros and the latter for BSD and OS X. Not sure yet about Chrome/Linux and Android/Linux. Nor about IPv6.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 3, Informative) by termigator on Thursday March 02 2017, @04:39PM (1 child)
RequestPolicy. One of the few reasons I still use Firefox.
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Thursday March 02 2017, @05:14PM
The add-on Privacy Badger [eff.org] helps, too, but there are many web bugs. So IMHO it's really best to just zap Facebook at the firewall as well.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:31AM
Yes you do. You may not know the log-in and password, but unless you have never had a picture tagged, never been mentioned in some-one else's posts, and never interacted online with anyone who has an account, then you do.
Look up "shadow" accounts. Facebook makes an account for any party to any interaction where they can't identify all participants. They spend a lot of effort merging that data back into real accounts whenever they can, and consolidating shadow accounts.
I would be very surprised if your shadow account didn't have your real name and address in it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Spamalope on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:45AM (2 children)
It's the current year. Car, health and home owners insurance companies will charge you higher rates if they can't track you and your friends via social media.
Tracking companies will create shadow profiles. Cell providers will help by liberating your location and contact info from your phone to cross reference, while recording all 'net access.
Poison their database. Give them information. Lots of information. All wrong. Or, mostly wrong. Make them try to figure it out. 1984 happened, but via Insurance bankers and Psychometric ad/propaganda/manipulation companies. I wonder what they make of my profile that has an 'All hetero sex is rape' feminist; an 'All sex outside of procreation is sin' religious fundamentalist; a hedonist; a pro dominatrix and a Trans rock band as FB friends.
(Score: 2) by DECbot on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:59PM
Go for it all and make your own profile as a religious fundamentalist hedonist, pro-gun-pro-choice, LBTGWTFBBQ trans-rock feminist dominatrix one-man, libertarian band against the man. Chances are you'll end up pegged as an ISIS supporter, that or as a community organizer.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:22PM
1984 did not happen. You should read the book it is actually very different than what most people meme about it. People rounded up for thinking the wrong things. People put into education camps if they stray from the narrative. People gaslighted into thinking they are not only wrong but the people who are wronging them are right. Mass surveillance is the tool of big brother to gaslight everyone into obeying him. Even the protagonist works in a news organization that likes to rewrite history to fit whatever big brother says. He questions it and gets a re-education for it.
Brave new world is closer to what is happening. We willingly subjugate ourselves for a bit of happiness. Facebook and Google ad networks would hold no power over us if we did not click on their things. We willingly are subjugated. Whereas in 1984 they are unwilling.
Both are critiques on communism and socialism respectively. The differences between the two and semi subtle but the end results are similar.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:11PM
The thing is they do not even have it right.
https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences [facebook.com]
If you have an account you can go look what it thinks of you. Politics is under lifestyle. There are tons of other things it thinks you are. For me it is 'kinda right'. But not very. It thinks I am a democrat. When that is not remotely true. However, many of my friends are.
Some of the sites smash your data together with other people. For example it smashed together stuff my dad likes and I like. Because at one point we lived in the same house.
These analytic tools are 'kinda right'. But when they are wrong they get it wildly wrong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:48AM (3 children)
Do Advertisers Know You Better Than You Know Yourself?
No. Every once in a while a web site finds a way to get their ads past my ad blocker. If they knew me that well, they would realize that this results in me avoiding that site.
That doesn't even require knowing people that well. "Oh, she has an ad blocker. Better not show any ads, if we want her as a customer" should require about three working neurons to figure out.
Kinda like "oh, that guy is waving his gun around. I probably shouldn't try to piss him off".
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:09AM (2 children)
If you are the type of person who would not buy the advertised stuff, driving you away from that web site is in the interest of the advertiser, as he won't have to pay the web site for you viewing an ad that's ineffective on you.
Of course driving you away from the web site is not in the interest of the site owner. But remember, typically the site owner and the advertiser are different entities, with different interests.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Thursday March 02 2017, @11:37AM
Of course driving you away from the web site is not in the interest of the site owner. But remember, typically the site owner and the advertiser are different entities, with different interests.
If the site owner hosts the ads then the site owner gets lumped in with the advertiser.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @01:05PM
If you are the type of person who would not buy the advertised stuff, driving you away from that web site is in the interest of the advertiser, as he won't have to pay the web site for you viewing an ad that's ineffective on you.
Advertisers pay for views or for views that result in buying something. Not showing any ads to me would not result in any payment to the web site.
Of course driving you away from the web site is not in the interest of the site owner. But remember, typically the site owner and the advertiser are different entities, with different interests.
Unless the web site owner accepts any and every javascript injected from the advertiser - viruses and other attacks included - the advertiser can't just decide to unilaterally "change the deal" with ad-blocker breaking code. And if the web site does accept any JS injected from the advertisers, they are at fault.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:31AM (1 child)
I'd want accurate ads - mainly for the novelty of it.
A bit more serious however - with the notable exceptions of newsletters I subscribe to and when an ad appears for the same thing that is the current page of search results I havn't seen an accurate on-line ad in over a decade.
Most ads I see are for (in order of how much it annoys me):
* Travel - I've been in the same four neighbouring counties (län) for 15 years (only two in the last ten years). I hate to travel.
* Fashion/clothes - I shop for durability foremost, and secondly only my tshirts and socks are even sold in this country (yes, I even order my briefs from abroad, funnily enough same brand as my tshirts)
* Food-related - let's just say I have enough stomach issues to make people recoil when I list them.
* Child-related - I've been seen throwing up as a response to have a child shoved in my face.
* Software for platforms I don't use (mac+win), or completly irrelevant software (batteryboosters? Wtf!?)
* Uninteresting hardware - showing me a case is the wrong way, if you want to pique my interest then show me the PCBs
* Working abroad - Hate to travel, gf insist I remain in the county, also not relevant for my specialisations (but they have at least figured out my field is related to engineering).
* Audiobooks - I enjoy listening to music when I read, also, it takes me more effort and time to process spoken language than written language (also - I can read and write more languages than I can talk or understand if I hear it).
So yeah. Accurate ads would be fun. Or at least if they stopped getting the categories so wrong - or at the very least stop with the freakin' lifestyle ads.
(And yes, in particular google should know my interests - I search for lots of stuff I'm interested in - which spans from needlepoint and sewing to nuclear reactor design and PLCs)
Sorry for the rant - but this really irks me.
(On the upside - I like the new spacing between "preview" and "submit")
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @01:13PM
And yes, in particular google should know my interests - I search for lots of stuff I'm interested in - which spans from needlepoint and sewing to nuclear reactor design and PLCs
Well there's your problem.
They've already shown you every single ad they have for affordable nuclear reactors, and now you're getting all the irrelevant crap :-)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Justin Case on Thursday March 02 2017, @02:22PM
My Tivo knows every show I watch. It knows what ones I mark to record, but never get around to watching. It knows what commercials I skip (all of them). It knows when I pause to examine, um, that's right, the interesting fabric she's wearing.
If that wasn't enough, I can thumbs-up and thumbs-down various shows.
Nevertheless, my Tivo thinks I love sports. It keeps advertising ("recommending") various sports shows.
Never mind that I thumbs-down every sports show I encounter. I even delete entirely the sports-only channels. It has run out of English sports to recommend so now it is bombing me with Spanish sports.
Because the poor pea-brain marketers somewhere back on the 100th floor of a New York office simply cannot imagine a "consumer" (that's all we are to them) who doesn't obsessively watch sports.
tl;dr: The advertisers can't fit me into one of their buckets because "my bucket" (no sports) is quite exactly unthinkable for them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @08:54PM
Let's see: GPS is based on atomic clocks, the speed of light, and physical laws that are known to be accurate to 10 or more significant digits. Psychologists can't even agree on the most basic processes in the human mind, and everyone is so different anyway. There's no such thing as "psychological GPS"! These advertisers are surely a bunch of hucksters who are trying to talk up their own effectiveness.