'Limit Ad Tracking' Popular in U.S. After iOS 10, Global Awareness 'Stagnant'

[RedWing512]

Remember,you are also making a decision to give the tracking companies, of which Google is the largest, but there are an many more, your information that helps them build a dossier that is sold to the marketers, and of course is available to hackers, governments, etc. And that personal information, like everything else Google collects, becomes their property and is retained forever in the profile they have about you. The reason the ad is "relevant" to you is that Google also knows where you live, drive, your searches, the content of your emails sent and received, every picture you've taken and where, who your friends are, the items you order, the music you listen to, etc. As an intelligence official once said, "If Google didn't exist, we'd have to invent it."

OK, I'll bite...

Here's an excerpt from an article on Android Central that explains how Google handles your info and selling it:

They know what we search for online, what we buy from Amazon (and other places), where we have been and places we've investigated and even how we got to the places we've been to. That's some scary stuff, but we need to remember that Google disassociates it all from your personal identity as it's collected and processed. No human being is reading your stuff, because there is too much stuff to read. Things about you are marked down and your unique advertising ID is how they keep track of what they think is important. And you have some control over all of this. Visit yourGoogle My Account pages and see just what you're sharing, and how you can manage it all. Opting out of interest-based ads is easy, though it doesn't mean Google stops collecting the data — they just stop using it in this way.

Google can then tell me that if I pay them X amount of dollars for advertising, they will be able to show my ads to devices (your phone, your tablet and your computer) being used by folks whose advertising ID shows they are interested in going fishing. My ads will also show in a rotation for people who have opted out and don't get interest-based ads, but the bulk of exposure my product will be getting is targeted to the people my research shows are most likely to buy my product or people who are searching for things that makes a computer think they like to go fishing.

If Google sold any of this information to anyone else, they wouldn't be able to offer this unique service to people wanting to by ad space. The amount of data Google collects can be scary, and the ways they collect and process it all is a bit confusing and technical (robots!), but they aren't selling your data. It's too valuable to let it go."

Long story short, the stance that Google "sells your data" and "lends it to the government" is a myth perpetuated by Apple. No advertiser buying from Google ever knows who you are (you're just a number) and it would be asinine to think that Google wouldn't try to keep your most private info secure--it's what the company is built around. Failure to do so by them would be a death wish.

​

 

[Afee]

OK, I'll bite...

Here's an excerpt from an article on Android Central that explains how Google handles your info and selling it:



Long story short, the stance that Google "sells your data" and "lends it to the government" is a myth perpetuated by Apple. No advertiser buying from Google ever knows who you are (you're just a number) and it would be asinine to think that Google wouldn't try to keep your most private info secure--it's what the company is built around. Failure to do so by them would be a death wish.

​

Add a gag-order, exfiltrate the data and the user is none the wiser. Anything else sir?
Apple went public when the FBI demanded data and exploits, but there are many companies that simply comply with government orders. And if Google's data was breached, I can imagine criminals not going public with that but use that data for their own benefit.
'If you can't secure it, or you don't need it, then don't store it!'

 

[RedWing512]

First of all, stop thinking for other people, we can do so fine ourselves.
Secondly, do you work for Google? It's either that or you are dangerously naive to the business model Google has been using for years (they're an ad company you know).
And lastly, why don't you give your users a choice in what they want to share? You're not seeing data of people like me anyway, so why not approach this issue from the positive side? Add a setting to disable trackers so your users can control their privacy. Because even if you don't care, it's MY data that is at stake.

For the sake of transparency, I am a Google user, and am heavily invested in the Android ecosystem. I think Google provides good services, and I trust them to do the right thing with my data.

Having said that, you certainly have that right to block Google Analytics and the like from "snooping" on you. But as I mentioned before, things like that exist for a reason. Here are a few points to consider:

1) If Google Analytics didn't exist, then devs would be using another service to get similar data.

2) Devs use the metrics from such services to improve what they make. Every person that has it turned off makes the data less reliable, and as I said before, hurts the devs in the long run.

3) The data gleaned from Google Analytics and similar services pale in comparison to what can be found from things like credit card transactions, phone calls, and chats. If you're paranoid over someone wanting to know what browser you used to visit a website, then you seriously have problems.

Devs use this stuff to make things better for you, but if you want to visit a crappy website or use a crappy app, that's up to you.
[doublepost=1476724340][/doublepost]

Add a gag-order, exfiltrate the data and the user is none the wiser. Anything else sir?
Apple went public when the FBI demanded data and exploits, but there are many companies that simply comply with government orders. And if Google's data was breached, I can imagine criminals not going public with that but use that data for their own benefit.
'If you can't secure it, or you don't need it, then don't store it!'

Again, it would be absolutely asinine to believe that Google would comply willingly, in the background, with any sort of government request for someone's data. As I said, it would be a death wish for the company should that kind of thing become public. With the amount of data they have, they need the trust of their users that what they share is private and secure, moreso than Apple.

And the same thing goes with a data breach. I'm fairly confident Google's doing everything it's power to protect said data from a massive breach. Again, not doing so would be a death wish.

But you keep believing what Apple's told you.

 

[Afee]

Devs use this stuff to make things better for you, but if you want to visit a crappy website or use a crappy app, that's up to you.

I know very well why devs use these services (I once was a dev), the problem lies with the company you use to get these stats.
Do you pay them? No.
Do I pay them? No.
Does their service cost heaps of money? Definitely.
So we have a gap here, and it's being filled with (mis)use of MY data, not yours. And you as a dev are an acomplice in this triangle relationship.
Not to attack you personally (almost every (web)dev does this, but there are so many other options. Personally I use serverside stats, or Piwik is a nice alternative, if you have decent hosting available.
Your last comment struck me as odd: so without analytics anything you create is 'crap'? I find that shocking tbh.

 

[Fynd]

Personally, I like it turned off. If I'm seeing ads, I'd rather ads that I care about than ads that I could care less about.

Tracked ads tend to be trash, in my experience. Typical scenario: I buy an item. For the next 2 weeks I see ads to buy that item. I already have it. Stop.

 

[Afee]

Again, it would be absolutely asinine to believe that Google would comply willingly, in the background, with any sort of government request for someone's data. As I said, it would be a death wish for the company should that kind of thing become public. With the amount of data they have, they need the trust of their users that what they share is private and secure, moreso than Apple.

And the same thing goes with a data breach. I'm fairly confident Google's doing everything it's power to protect said data from a massive breach. Again, not doing so would be a death wish.

But you keep believing what Apple's told you.

True, but Yahoo did, Twitter did, *all* telco's did...so what's the point? It's not up to Google to comply or not, the law simply demands, period. And only if you don't have data, are you excused for not supplying it.
And I'm sure Google does everything it can. So does everybody who was alive yesterday and is dead today. Intent has nothing to do with result or outcome.
And I don't get your 'Apple told you' remark: I just refer security related news. Check it out sometimes, there a world to be discovered there!

PS: can you share which apps you develop?

 

[Googlyhead]

Tracked ads tend to be trash, in my experience. Typical scenario: I buy an item. For the next 2 weeks I see ads to buy that item. I already have it. Stop.

That is actually quite accurate; my work computer doesn't have much ability to apply privacy settings, and pretty much every time I search for some gizmo or container; I'll get nothing but ads for those things for ages afterwards. Which is completely pointless as it's likely a one-off purchase I researched and made that same day - it's very unlikely I'm going to spend a small fortune on an alternative / replacement system immediately.
The "targeting" completely lacks the intelligence or discrimination needed to be relevant beyond simply "here's one with money; gogogogogo".

And as the topic has unsurprisingly come to include concerns about google analytics; it has to be pointed out that a major reason why more people are concerned enough to toggle this option on is simply the repeated attempts to abuse such data and preferences by Google and Facebook and others.

 

[Fynd]

That is actually quite accurate; my work computer doesn't have much ability to apply privacy settings, and pretty much every time I search for some gizmo or container; I'll get nothing but ads for those things for ages afterwards. Which is completely pointless as it's likely a one-off purchase I researched and made that same day - it's very unlikely I'm going to spend a small fortune on an alternative / replacement system immediately.
The "targeting" completely lacks the intelligence or discrimination needed to be relevant beyond simply "here's one with money; gogogogogo".

And as the topic has unsurprisingly come to include concerns about google analytics; it has to be pointed out that a major reason why more people are concerned enough to toggle this option on is simply the repeated attempts to abuse such data and preferences by Google and Facebook and others.

Come to think of it, limiting ad targeting probably increases my value for the advertisers. Spamming me with ads for things i've already purchased or I'm no longer interested in does nothing. At least showing me different unrelated things might catch my attention.

 

[truthertech]

OK, I'll bite...

Here's an excerpt from an article on Android Central that explains how Google handles your info and selling it:



Long story short, the stance that Google "sells your data" and "lends it to the government" is a myth perpetuated by Apple. No advertiser buying from Google ever knows who you are (you're just a number) and it would be asinine to think that Google wouldn't try to keep your most private info secure--it's what the company is built around. Failure to do so by them would be a death wish.

​

Of course Google doesn't "lend your data" to governments and no one said so. And no remotely suggested that Google,and others like Facebook, just sell your complete dossier. It's done in small chunks, literally to the highest bidder. It is available in total via legal process in the US and by whatever means other countries use to get their citizens' data. It's also available to hackers, foreign governments, etc. Finally, it's your choice if you are comfortable with some corporate entity owning all of your most private data to do with it whatever brings them the most money, now or in the future, and to sell portions of it to other companies, but many of us are glad there are other options if you care about privacy.

Like boiling a frog, Google, and others, have gradually accustomed you to accept a previously inconceivable panopticon environment that they control, where you allow them to scan and store every email or message you send and receive, know and record every post you make, have a list of every book or article you've ever read, know every place you've ever visited, every person you've communicated with, every song or podcast or movie you've ever listened to or watched, your friends, associates, intimates.

And you can't imagine how anyone assembling/controlling all of that or having it available for the government or hackers could be a problem?

 

[SBlue1]

I've had that turned on for years. Surprised it's only at 20% in the US

Same here. Screw everybody who uses this tracing on me.

 

[macs4nw]

"Places like the Netherlands, with 22 percent, beat out the United States.".....

MR makes it sound like it's a contest now. Perhaps we're more used to being bombarded with ad content than some European countries, and we're probably more resigned to putting up with it. Nevertheless, the recent iOS10 'Identifier for Advertising' tweak is a welcome feature, and LAT will no doubt be selected by many. I know I will.

 

[KALLT]

That is actually quite accurate; my work computer doesn't have much ability to apply privacy settings, and pretty much every time I search for some gizmo or container; I'll get nothing but ads for those things for ages afterwards. Which is completely pointless as it's likely a one-off purchase I researched and made that same day - it's very unlikely I'm going to spend a small fortune on an alternative / replacement system immediately.
The "targeting" completely lacks the intelligence or discrimination needed to be relevant beyond simply "here's one with money; gogogogogo".

That is the challenge of Big Data and exactly the reason why Google Analytics is so ubiquitous and why Google promotes it so heavily to developers. Google knows that its algorithms are not perfect and that their data is at best incomplete. They want their advertising and analytics platforms to be successful and be embedded everywhere. Ideally, they want you to use devices with Google software while using a Google account while receiving your Internet connection from them (Google Fiber). They need as many data points as they can get as well as a constant supply of new data. At some point, these advertisements will get more and more precise and I suspect they already are for invested Google users or people who have not done anything to reign it in.