[_greim_]

I think on the general principle of privacy. But also, the idea that the more trackable you are, the more easily manipulated you are by marketers and advertisers. Free markets work better the more consumers are rational. Giving marketers deep psychological and behavioral insight increasingly enables them to circumvent rationality and "hack" consumers in various ways.

[shurcooL]

Thanks for a constructive and very insightful response.

This definitely seems to be a valid reason why people would be against being tracked. We don't want to be more easily manipulated (through the data that the ones doing tracking are able to acquire) and coerced into buying things we don't want/need (but the ones doing tracking want us to buy).

Would it be accurate to describe it like this: the consumers' interests are to be rational, less easily manipulated and "unhackable", and being tracked is a threat to those interests.

On the other hand, the store owners are trying their best to get their products sold, so their interests are opposite of the consumers, to find ways to sell as many things as possible.

If that's accurate, I find it interesting that there are these underlying "wars" occurring within a single species. In fact, a single person may wake up and go to work one morning, serving in the position of the one doing the "tracking" and fighting against the interests of consumers, then in the evening they may go shopping and end up on the other side, fighting against the interests of the ones doing tracking.

Pretty fascinating.

[Alex_MJ]

That's decently accurate. We're all doing what's in our best interest, in the role that we play in that time.

In general - I want to give people who don't know me personally (and especially people trying to sell me anything) less power to catch my attention and pull at my impulses, not more.

[Tloewald]

There's a ton of evidence we aren't doing what's in our best interest at minimum a significant minority of the time. In any event, the claim of economics isn't that people act in their best interest, but that they try to maximize happiness* -- whatever that is (it's rather recursively defined -- happiness is produced by voluntary transactions, which in turn are voluntary because both parties believe that the exchange will make them happier).

* or whatever it is makes transactions pareto optimal.

Meanwhile, behavioral economists have shown humans aren't even great at pursuing happiness; perhaps they have reached their high water mark, but they're certainly not completely wrong.

[_greim_]

> Would it be accurate to describe it like this: the consumers' interests are to be rational, less easily manipulated and "unhackable", and being tracked is a threat to those interests.

In my view, yes. Being rational is by definition the only way to make my life better. The harder it is to be rational—to perceive the truth through all the layers of bullshit and manipulation—the less I trust my own conclusions, and free markets in general.

[pjc50]

underlying "wars" occurring within a single species

Have you met any humans lately? We all have divergent interests, differently expressed in different aspects of our lives. The entirety of law and politics is this.

[rahimnathwani]

There's a flip side to this. Being less trackable means that any passive advertising or active marketing you do see is less tailored to your situation and needs.

When I walk around I see many billboards advertising products for which I have no use (e.g. female hair care products). If tracking technology could replace those with things I actually might buy (even if male hair care products) then I would be a touch happier.

[User9812]

Do you know what companies never do? They never ask.

I see dating ads, cars advertisements, feminine healthcare products, insurance ads, etc. What do I want to see? Travel accessories, computers, hardware, games, tech gadgets, etc. I never see these ads.

Why doesn't Google say, hey, you're going to see Adsense all over the internet, advertisements before videos on YouTube, etc. Would you like to select a few categories so that time is spent seeing some cool products that are relevant to you?

I've been on the internet for 15+ years, and no one stopped to ask just once. I could select categories in about 20 seconds that would be more accurate than all this data collection and profiling that happens every day.

Instead, I just block ads, and install ad block on every computer I come across. I make my living off ad revenue, but ads are absolutely awful, irrelevant and too often malicious. If they gave me the option to select some categories in the past, I probably would have discovered some decent products to buy, and keep them turned on. But nope, I can't recall clicking an ad in the past decade.

[robkeane]

You can set your interests for ads (and see what Google thinks you like) here: https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads

[lucaspiller]

Google thinks I am 15 years older than I am and I like cats.

[pjc50]

But if they asked, you could lie to them. Lots of people would. There's a total presumptive lack of trust, which is part of why the whole business is so corrosive.

[akira2501]

Serious question: are you sure you'd actually be happier? I like efficiency as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean that I'm looking forward to companies more efficiently marketing to me. Especially if it's going to be constant.

[sliverstorm]

I have already started to notice ads targeted at me. Ads for niche outdoor gear companies that I patronize.

I can report that it has indeed made me happier, as compared to when the ads were "Click here, Millionth visitor, and win a prize!". The dragnet advertising is a constant assault on your intelligence.

It also helps that the targeted ads I am seeing are tasteful & well designed.

I adblock 90%+ of the time, but I let ads through on some websites.

[akira2501]

It can go both ways. When I was researching for the next car I was going to buy, I started getting a _ton_ of car advertisements; however, most of them were useless. What their simple algorithm failed to notice is that I was looking at a very specific class of cars, and I spent more than 1 hour on several manufacturers websites doing research and had mostly narrowed in on my choice. The proper move would be to see that and advertise different dealerships to me, but I only got ads for other cars that I already decided I _didn't_ want.

Also, I like to research, in general. Which means I can often come across and get deeply into some very odd subjects and it seems there are some odd correlations out there in society. For example, after doing a bunch of research on different world religions and their origin stories, I started getting ads for the Mormon church, and strangely, for all types of gambling websites, destinations and attractions. None of this advertising was of any use.

[rahimnathwani]

No, I'm not sure. However, I suspect we have some way to go before ad tech gets good enough to creep me out.

[xrjn]

I guess it comes down to a difference in acceptability of intrusive advertising. Personally, I am absolutely disgusted when adverts are tailored towards me (especially since I don't see them most of the time with Adblock).

Seeing tailored advertisements brings me a feeling of despair, in the sense that your personal privacy is being exchanged for money. It only serves as a sad reminder that you must actively fight to protect it, and that we, as consumers, are failing at it right now.

[MichaelGG]

Is it not easier to tune ads out if they're not targeted? If I want to buy something, I'll go look for it.

[ajslater]

Just opt in. Explicitly.

[baddox]

What's bad or irrational about being manipulated by marketers and advertisers? I don't see how buying something because some marketing convinced you of its worth is irrational.

[ertdfgcb]

I just don't like them tracking me without asking my permission or even alerting me.

> I don't see how buying something because some marketing convinced you of its worth is irrational.

It's not as much that they convinced me to buy something, it's that they did it by using data they got by essentially spying on me.

[_greim_]

Listen to your sentence, once you factor out the internal contradictions (emphasis mine):

> What's bad or irrational about being manipulated by marketers and advertisers? I don't see how buying something because some marketing manipulated you into thinking it was worth buying is irrational.

[baddox]

Can you take a stab at answering the question?