When Opting Out of Ad Tracking Doesn't Opt You Out

jfruh writes "Privacy blogger Dan Tynan couldn't help but notice the ads targeting his web browsing for a plus-sized women's clothing store, not least because he's neither a woman nor plus-sized. But trying to figure out why those ads kept popping up in his browser led to some disturbing discoveries. He had opted out of targeted Google ads, and at first glance the ads seemed to come from Google — but digging deeper, he found that Google's DoubleClick was only the intermediary, which meant his opt-out didn't apply. And his opt-outs from other ad services seemed to have vanished."

Comments

opt-outs

[girlintraining]

Opt-outs are a scam. They have been since the late 90s. Opting out just tells spammers that they hit a real e-mail address, and thus its value goes up. It also tells them one other important piece of information: You're willing to click on links that send you to random websites.

Anyone who tries to 'opt out' is an idiot, and anyone who suggests them as a solution to spam and advertising should be dragged into the street and stoned to death. There is only one solution: Get rid of all of it. The end. Stop your monetization of the web 2.0 synergizing cluster fuck of the internet... it survived just fine before you vultures descended on it. It will survive your demise as well.

Just use adBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

And solve the problem.

Re:Just use adBlock

[i kan reed]

Yep, lots of people on the internet say "but what about the revenue of the sites you use." It ignores that there's never going to be a mutual respect there, no matter how much you respect the source.

Not sure. But I am opting out of the new slashdot.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen beta.slashdot.org and was horrified. Once the "old" slashdot goes away, so will this nearly two-decade user.

Seems to need an ad blocker.

[linebackn]

Seriously, there are STILL people out there using browsers without ad blockers?! Are they also still using IE 6?

Hint: If you are using Windows 95 or NT 3.51 then SeaMonkey 1.1.19 and Adblock 0.5 or Adblock Plus 1.0.2 do a great job.

There is just no excuse.

Re:Seems to need an ad blocker.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well... I can think of one excuse. Many websites that I like rely on advertising revenue.

And that's why adblock has a whitelist option so that you can whitelist the sites that don't display intrusive/abusive advertising. It even has a checkbox for "allow unobtrusive advertising" when selecting filters, which lets through things such as the google text based ads.

Now where's you're excuse?

Does this surprise anybody ?

[aepervius]

No , really ? I am not surprised. The ad industry torpedoed every instance of normal regulation and do not track, they are handling self regulation like robber barron, laughing all the way. There is only one option : the nuclear option, and it is adblocking. All of it. And if a web site does not want to show me anything because I block ads , well I can most probably live without that web site.

Re:Ads are anti-capitalist

[vux984]

How is trying to control the information people receive about your product anything but a logical and necessary outcome of capitalism?

Capitalism relies on people trying to make the best decision for themselves they can, based on what information they have.

The validity of that hypothesis rests on several assumptions:

That people are not coerced.
That people act under rational self interest.
That the competitive market itself will facilitate consumers getting the information they need to make decisions.

Advertising has achieved a level of sophistication that this is no longer entirely true. The information available is not reliable, and I cannot make informed buying decisions.

All that's left working in the customers favor is direct word of mouth, reputation systems (wherein I might trust a particular reviewer who has steered me well in the past), and government regulation (truth in advertising, labelling laws, etc... which some beleive are anti-capitalist, and everyone knows are largely co-opted and corrupted or just outright violated by the regulated industries).

Compared what the industries are prepared to expend "controlling" information; with what I have at my disposal to research something? I am at such a substantial disadvantage that I am frequently operating against my own self interest. And I'm in the minority just being truly aware of it.

For example, if I want to buy an X and I don't know much about X, and its not something my friends or family use then I'm pretty much helpless.

Word of mouth doesn't work if I don't know people I trust with an X.
I can't rely on a reviewer of X if I don't have any experience with that reviewer (and I know that many reviewers are shills, or just plain idiots)

I can't rely on review sites and such, I know in many cases the reviews are paid, the 'likes' and 'followers' and '+1' are corrupt or paid for, and full of idiots. And in the worst cases, the entire review site is 'fake' and hosted by the vendor.

I've learned to try and filter out what i need from newegg and amazon.com and other review sites -- but its cat and mouse, and the advertisers get cleverer, and my resources to combat them are not increasing proportionally. And for some products... I don't really know where to even start, and again I like to think I'm 'above average' at this 'game'.

It's sick really.

Don't trust them

[Dunge]

Don't trust marketers to honor the "do not track", they never will. The solution is simple: Install AdBlock, Ghostery, Disconnect.me AND PeerBlock. Death to online tracking.