Facebook loses $10 billion due to new Apple security feature

[sggatecl]

When giving people a choice to act in their own best interest kills your business you?re probably a piece of shit company run by a piece of shit.

Facebook parent Meta said on Wednesday that the privacy change Apple made to its iOS operating system last year will decrease the social media company?s sales this year by about $10 billion

Apple allowed users to block some tracking of their internet use, which has made it harder for brands to target and measure their ads on Facebook and Instagram, which is also owned by Meta. Meta CFO David Wehner said on a conference call with analysts that the impact from Apple's privacy changes could be "in the order of $10 billion" for 2022.

 

[tomdalton22]

I don't see anything wrong with brands targeting adds...and I don't see anything wrong with people having the ability to block those adds.

The add that I am viewing on this site right now...Belle Tire. Last week I googled some tires for our Jeep. The add for Belle Tire is offering up to $200 off on 4 Goodyear tires.

I think I'm going to go google bikini...see how long it takes for DFS to start showing women in bikinis instead of tire adds.

 

[sggatecl]

I don't see anything wrong with brands targeting adds...and I don't see anything wrong with people having the ability to block those adds.

The add that I am viewing on this site right now...Belle Tire. Last week I googled some tires for our Jeep. The add for Belle Tire is offering up to $200 off on 4 Goodyear tires.

I think I'm going to go google bikini...see how long it takes for DFS to start showing women in bikinis instead of tire adds.

I have multiple issues with Facebook's data mining practices and you just mentioned one of them.

You Googled tires for your jeep. I don't like the idea of Facebook scanning other apps for any purpose. Ad targeting, selling my information/data, etc. Now if I'm talking about buying tires for my Jeep on the Facebook app itself, fine. But Facebook shouldn't be scanning my texts, my Google searches, or any other app but it's own. That's a step (or several) too far in my opinion.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't see anything wrong with brands targeting adds...and I don't see anything wrong with people having the ability to block those adds.

The add that I am viewing on this site right now...Belle Tire. Last week I googled some tires for our Jeep. The add for Belle Tire is offering up to $200 off on 4 Goodyear tires.

I think I'm going to go google bikini...see how long it takes for DFS to start showing women in bikinis instead of tire adds.

The technology is pretty impressive but most of the time it's completely useless. I bought a refrigerator online and for at least a week I was getting ads for refrigerators - how many refrigerators do they think I need? Similarly, I recently bought my 12yr old son a new pair of basketball shoes, now I'm getting ads for basketball shoes left and right, in his size. Again, clever that they're showing me shoes in the size I ordered but I'm not buying anymore hoops shoes for a year and by then he won't be wearing a 10.5.

 

[Spartanmack]

I have multiple issues with Facebook's data mining practices and you just mentioned one of them.

You Googled tires for your jeep. I don't like the idea of Facebook scanning other apps for any purpose. Ad targeting, selling my information/data, etc. Now if I'm talking about buying tires for my Jeep on the Facebook app itself, fine. But Facebook shouldn't be scanning my texts, my Google searches, or any other app but it's own. That's a step (or several) too far in my opinion.

I completely agree with this - they should just stay in their lane, only track activity on their platform and give their users the option to opt out of being tracked. Go ahead and charge them for using the platform if they don't want to share their data, or maybe pay them for their data but give them some kind of option. Zuckerberg has to be the most arrogant prick on the planet - all those arrogant assholes at Davos probably complain about what an arrogant prick he is.

 

[tomdalton22]

It took a while but my first bikini adds started appearing. Much better than the Belle tire adds!

 

[tinselwolverine]

It took a while but my first bikini adds started appearing. Much better than the Belle tire adds!

How many bikinis did you have to buy online to make that happen?

 

[Michchamp]

I have multiple issues with Facebook's data mining practices and you just mentioned one of them.

You Googled tires for your jeep. I don't like the idea of Facebook scanning other apps for any purpose. Ad targeting, selling my information/data, etc. Now if I'm talking about buying tires for my Jeep on the Facebook app itself, fine. But Facebook shouldn't be scanning my texts, my Google searches, or any other app but it's own. That's a step (or several) too far in my opinion.

Not only that, but the "vertical integration" aspect of it... both facebook and google own the platforms they sell ads on, control all the data (such as the ad performance and clicks), and control the search results. It's a cesspool, as sleazy as any, and that's even aside from the fact that they take as aggressive positions tracking users as possible.

So, yeah they show you ads for tires; these aren't the best prices you could get, or the best tires for you based on your search... these are the tires offered by the seller who bid the most for the ad impressions.

As an advertiser, the more you spend with google and facebook they'll direct more eyeballs and clicks your way. Your sales may boil down to being a function of how much money you give them, since they control the search engine results.

This is a huge anti-trust issue; neither of these companies should be able to essentially own the marketplace, sell booths in it, decide which customers get in, and which merchants they'll shop with. It's all opaque to both the advertisers and the customers, but slanted toward google's and facebook's benefit.

 

[tomdalton22]

Not only that, but the "vertical integration" aspect of it... both facebook and google own the platforms they sell ads on, control all the data (such as the ad performance and clicks), and control the search results. It's a cesspool, as sleazy as any, and that's even aside from the fact that they take as aggressive positions tracking users as possible.

So, yeah they show you ads for tires; these aren't the best prices you could get, or the best tires for you based on your search... these are the tires offered by the seller who bid the most for the ad impressions.

As an advertiser, the more you spend with google and facebook they'll direct more eyeballs and clicks your way. Your sales may boil down to being a function of how much money you give them, since they control the search engine results.

This is a huge anti-trust issue; neither of these companies should be able to essentially own the marketplace, sell booths in it, decide which customers get in, and which merchants they'll shop with. It's all opaque to both the advertisers and the customers, but slanted toward google's and facebook's benefit.

I'm not an expert in anti trust law, but consumers aren't forced to use google or facebook. I can use any search engine I want to use. I did a google search looking for the number of search engines there are and an article came up with the title "20 great search engines you can use instead of google"

As far as facebook...I have never been on that site and don't plan to.

People don't have to use these platforms if they don't want to.

 

[mhughes0021]

Facebook: "Oh no..i cant tip my Uber driver this week"

 

[Michchamp]

I have multiple issues with Facebook's data mining practices and you just mentioned one of them.

You Googled tires for your jeep. I don't like the idea of Facebook scanning other apps for any purpose. Ad targeting, selling my information/data, etc. Now if I'm talking about buying tires for my Jeep on the Facebook app itself, fine. But Facebook shouldn't be scanning my texts, my Google searches, or any other app but it's own. That's a step (or several) too far in my opinion.

I believe both FB and google claim their scans are automated and user-blind/anonymous.



Gmail used to openly show ads based on keywords they identified in your emails, but they stopped several years ago, when public opinion eventually formed against such a blatant violation of privacy.

Since the FTC has basically let tech giants police themselves here, there's a HUGE incentive for them to cheat and violate their own privacy policies, or privacy laws.

nobody in corporate America is going to stop and ask some VP if they increased their sales legally or not... or whether the windfall they got from selling customer data to some shady data aggregator complied with the company's privacy policy. It's akin to theft, but because it's all digital, and nobody knows it, or puts a cash value on their privacy or their data rights, nobody cares like they should.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm not an expert in anti trust law, but consumers aren't forced to use google or facebook. I can use any search engine I want to use. I did a google search looking for the number of search engines there are and an article came up with the title "20 great search engines you can use instead of google"

As far as facebook...I have never been on that site and don't plan to.

People don't have to use these platforms if they don't want to.

Yes, you're not an expert in anti-trust law.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Yes, you're not an expert in anti-trust law.

Wait - so according to anti-trust laws consumers ARE forced to use Facebook and google?

Damn?that don?t seem right.

 

[Michchamp]

Wait - so according to anti-trust laws consumers ARE forced to use Facebook and google?

Damn?that don?t seem right.

That's not how it works; you don't have to be a monopoly to violate anti-trust laws, (although market share is a basis for anti-trust action) you have to restrain competition unreasonably.

 

[Michchamp]

The technology is pretty impressive ...

Not really; it's pretty basic. They use the cookies on your browser, (sometimes they use "persistent cookies," web beacons, or otherwise cookies that are nearly impossible to delete) to collect your data based on the sites you visit, search history, and who knows what else.

From there, they write some pretty simple software code that tells the ad software on your browser which ad to display, based on your history. It might target more recent history, or it might target you based on the overall history, or based on whatever demographics they've pigeon-holed you into.

Facebook's tracking - based off the data users give them - is even more targeted... I remember one of the digital marketing guys at a prior company I worked for telling me when he heard their sales pitch, he was surprised how specific of audiences they could produce to target.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Facebook losing money? Its a good day.

 

[Michchamp]

Facebook losing money? Its a good day.

One of the few things we can all agree on.

Actually maybe the only thing we can all agree on.

 

[tigermud]

Facebook losing money? Its a good day.

sure is. I hope they eventually go bankrupt, anyone find a decent replacement for it yet? I haven't..:-( MeWe sucked no one wanted to follow me there, Gab is nothing but echo chamber politics. I'm sure GETTR is much the same. Parlor's servers are in Russia, no thanks that's an entrapment con now. oh well. Trumps new stupidity named truth social site is supposed to be coming out soon. I'm guessing my orange man bad friends won't follow me over there though either. oh what a cluster.

 

[Spartanmack]

Not only that, but the "vertical integration" aspect of it... both facebook and google own the platforms they sell ads on, control all the data (such as the ad performance and clicks), and control the search results. It's a cesspool, as sleazy as any, and that's even aside from the fact that they take as aggressive positions tracking users as possible.

So, yeah they show you ads for tires; these aren't the best prices you could get, or the best tires for you based on your search... these are the tires offered by the seller who bid the most for the ad impressions.

As an advertiser, the more you spend with google and facebook they'll direct more eyeballs and clicks your way. Your sales may boil down to being a function of how much money you give them, since they control the search engine results.

This is a huge anti-trust issue; neither of these companies should be able to essentially own the marketplace, sell booths in it, decide which customers get in, and which merchants they'll shop with. It's all opaque to both the advertisers and the customers, but slanted toward google's and facebook's benefit.

Do the ads claim to be the best and/or cheapest tires? It's not FB or Google's fault if some lazy schlub overpays for their tires.

 

[Mitchrapp]

sure is. I hope they eventually go bankrupt, anyone find a decent replacement for it yet? I haven't..:-( MeWe sucked no one wanted to follow me there, Gab is nothing but echo chamber politics. I'm sure GETTR is much the same. Parlor's servers are in Russia, no thanks that's an entrapment con now. oh well. Trumps new stupidity named truth social site is supposed to be coming out soon. I'm guessing my orange man bad friends won't follow me over there though either. oh what a cluster.

Never used it, that's the right decision.