archive.is link

It’s possible that consumers are happy to have the most minute details of their lives surveilled and monetized in return for seeing ads they might want to click on. This is a hard theory to test, because very few people even know they’re making the trade. However, one organization recently tried to find out. After the European Union’s landmark privacy law, the General Data Protection Regulation, went into effect in 2018, a Dutch public broadcasting agency started prompting all visitors to its website to choose, in a clear and straightforward manner, whether they wanted their data shared with advertisers. The result? Ninety percent opted out, and the agency abandoned behavioral advertising altogether. (A Google spokesperson notes that all users can opt out of personalized ads, and that Google has long prohibited personalized advertising based on sensitive information.)

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 days ago

      This seems to be mainly about billboards. I’m talking mainly about a sign on your door that explains what your business is. I hadn’t initially thought of this as a form of advertising but it technically is.

      I’d be open to discussing a broader ban but my current thinking is that this very basic type of advertising which is primarily informational may be do more good than harm.

      • Snot Flickerman
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 days ago

        Ah gotcha, yeah, the sign on the door shouldn’t be banned, I agree. That might get confusing if nothing is labelled past an address.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 days ago

      i used to live near a suburb that banned billboards as well as ‘great signs’ (the big and usually tall lit-up signs for businesses) over a certain height (they all had to be fairly short and set back from the roadways). there was also no overhead telephone or power lines there. everywhere should be like that.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Smartphones at present are small surveillance devices vaguely dressed up as a tool. That medicine is far worse then the disease. I’m going to say at least a very plain description and open/closed signs need to be up.

      Las Vegas wouldn’t be the same without all the lights. Where I live there’s a limit to one moderately-sized sandwich board, and I quite like it. Somewhere else they might want totally bare streets. All could be accommodated.

      • Snot Flickerman
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Smartphones at present are small surveillance devices vaguely dressed up as a tool.

        You know, surveillance of those devices is a choice, right? They’re actually a tool with surveillance slapped on top, it’s literally just a computer (and on an Android you can even install different operating systems with surveillance blocked). And what industry wants to surveil those devices the most? Oh yeah, fuck me, it’s MARKETING!

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          I did say “at present”.

          You can install LineageOS (assuming you have a reflashable piece of hardware) and run it in airplane mode, it’s true, although that itself is slowly getting more difficult as everything gets app-ified. Just doing stuff the boomer way is easier in practice, in my experience - which, again, is at present.

          If we’re allowed completely changing the way the telecom and tech sectors operate ahead of time, yeah, I guess we can get rid of physical signs and just look at the world through our phone screens. That’s obviously a taller order than adding a single regulation, though.