[Drakim]

Normal ads are perfectly fine to show, so it's only the privacy violation that's in question.

I genuinely don't think you should have even the ability to give up your privacy, for the same reason we don't allow people to sell themselves into slavery, or give up the right to a fair trial, or give up your freedom of speech, even if it's clearly written out in a ToS that you are giving up those things.

I think there should be a bunch of fundamental rights that all humans have, and there should not be the possibility of selling or give those rights up.

[cvwright]

The challenge that they’re up against is, nobody wants to pay for “normal” non-targeted ads. The death of normal ads was called the “adpocalypse” and it took down some pretty major web properties who didn’t adapt. Dr Dobbs Journal was one of them.

[bko]

What is a normal non targeted ad?

If a feminine hygiene company has to show non targeted ads to 50% men, who benefits? They have to advertise more than twice as much, Facebook can't charge as much, and I get weird irrelevant ads that make my experience worse.

[scarface_74]

You very much have the ability to and are encouraged by the government to give up your right to a fair trial. It’s called a plea bargain and over 90% of cases never go to trial in the US.

You are also allowed to give up your freedom of speech - it’s called a non disclosure agreement.

[bko]

Can you be more specific about what you mean?

Can Facebook know that for instance I am a man, or I live in the US, or that I speak English? What is the line?

Ive never seen a practical model for what "privacy" means in this regard. Of course targeted ads are not new, as advertisments you see in Vogue is different than those in Men's Fitness and different that those in Jet.

So happy to consider the idea that privacy is something that can't be sold no matter the price as long as you have a coherent model of what privacy is

[Grumbledour]

And from my reading of it, the GDPR agrees and the whole "Data or money" thing is actually not "freely given consent" and thus void. But sadly, the data protection officers are really dragging their feet here and don't bring this to the courts. Might be because the big European publishing houses seem to all have adopted this strategy and they have a powerfull lobby. And just as facebook, most of them set ridiculous prices because they just want you to say yes to all data harvesting instead.