Comments (7)
For discussion about "people browsing the web, who often prefer ads for things they are interested in", check out the Google A/B experiment from last year that observed the impact of dropping 3p cookies. Most of it is about money, and indeed that's the context in which I linked to the paper in the TURTLEDOVE Introduction section. But their "Additional Reflections" section includes this bit:
Another observation from the randomized experiment: users expressed greater dissatisfaction with non-personalized ads because they were not interested in what the ads were showing them. Users can choose to stop seeing an ad by clicking on an “X” that appears on a display ad to close the ad. We saw a 21% increase in user clicks to close an ad by the treatment group (who encountered non-personalized ads). When prompted with a list of reasons why they wanted to stop seeing an ad, there was a 21% increase in user clicks on the reason “Not interested in this ad” and a 29% increase in user clicks on the reason “Seen this ad multiple times”.
Of course that's behavioral data, not UX research. A Google search for Do users prefer personalized ads shows links to lots of people claiming data on that question, and of course they have a wide range of numbers and sometimes contradictory conclusions.
So if the browser takes on the role described in TURTLEDOVE, we will absolutely need some UX research on how to present it to our users. The User Interface Controls section of the Explainer has a few preliminary thoughts about the browser could offer, once it's directly involved in how interest groups are stored and used.
Note, of course, that the UX choices are the domain of each individual browser, not part of any standards process.
from turtledove.
I think you're putting the cart before the horse.
For any new standard like this, we need to see evidence that there is a user need - or user desire - for it.
This proposal jumps from "I've had a great idea" straight to "and here's how to implement it" without asking "do the users want this?"
I suggest halting further development until you can demonstrate that this idea would be helpful to real users.
from turtledove.
Ah sorry, I misunderstood. From that point of view, the user desire that we're serving here is privacy. The whole Privacy Sandbox is a suite of efforts to make the web dramatically more private than today, without breaking lots of things.
from turtledove.
I agree with @edent in that users are confused, scared, and unaware of what tracking is and how it works. Instead of focusing on transparency as a first phase, we have jumped to the conclusion that all tracking is bad and tracking must be eliminated. When we know that tracking injects significant value into the ecosystem, between marketers and creators of free content. We have repeatedly seen this in decreased revenue to publishers when cookies are absent. What we do know is that the majority of users prefer free content over paying for content: https://www.networkadvertising.org/blog-entry/nai-consumer-survey-privacy-and-digital-advertising/
from turtledove.
@ascentitall This is a proposal about how to continue to inject significant value into the ecosystem, without the need for the widespread cross-site tracking that it's built on today. So I don't think what you're saying is a relevant complaint about TURTLEDOVE.
I quite agree that transparency is a valuable goal. Check out the User Interface Controls part of this Explainer for the kind of transparency that browsers could be in a position to offer here.
from turtledove.
I'd like to keep this discussion open. Have you spoken to any end-users about this proposal?
from turtledove.
Just following up on this thread; I agree an unbias user study would be helpful here. The difficulty would be explaining to the users what the change entails. The proposal does not prevent tracking; it changes how tracking works, and which powers have control of what and how it is limited.
An early user study determining the primary change that is definitively part of fledge, i.e. cohort tracking and the differences to the current system, would be useful. This is a drastic change the the web technology stack. A later user study explaining the roles and powers of different players and where trust lies in how the data is transmitted could also be useful once Fledge is fully fleshed out, though it may be difficult to explain the innerworkings of adtech.
As part of a bias test different groups could construct different prompts to see if there is a large difference in user delight or rejection. We'd also have to account for sample bias (who would be willing to take the survey, and are they less indifferent) etc.
from turtledove.
Related Issues (20)
- Measuring interest groups size on device
- responding before 50ms deadline HOT 3
- Using Web Workers in the JS bidding function HOT 3
- navigator.adAuctionComponents not described in spec HOT 1
- adSize not accepted as sizeGroup HOT 4
- Enabling Ghost ads incrementality studies in Protected Audience HOT 2
- [Spec] `perSlotSizeQueryParam` isn't initialized HOT 2
- Multiple IG exclusion in non-remarketing ads
- multi-seller auction vs on-device resources HOT 2
- Private Aggregation API Per Buyer Latency Stats HOT 1
- Yes indeed — the Doodle poll's most popular time is Wednesday at 11am Boston / 5pm Paris / 8am California, approved by 34/39 voters. We'll start with that on this coming Wed Feb 3.
- Consider adding ability to read Interest Groups in Shared Storage worklets HOT 5
- API change to trigger a daily update right after a JoinAdInterestGroup event. HOT 12
- Extremely Minor: Chrome on Ubuntu, Default to Off? HOT 1
- Publisher creating interest groups HOT 10
- Privacy Issues with the Existing Auction Nonce Implementation HOT 1
- Guidance required - how to implement diversity filtering when running native advertising in PAAPI with multi sellers and multi auctions HOT 20
- USENIX fledging paper issues HOT 1
- Get the mandatory unsandboxed flags from the fenced frame spec.
- FLEDGE on-device auctions end-to-end latency
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from turtledove.