back to article Max Schrems is back... and he's challenging Apple's 'secret iPhone advertising tracking cookies' in Europe

Privacy activist Max Schrems is back, and this time he has filed complaints against Apple for privacy violations over a cookie it places in iPhones for some advertisers. His digital rights group Noyb has targeted the tech giant in Germany and Spain, claiming Cupertino's “Identifier for Advertisers” (IDFA) tracking ID, which is …

  1. IGotOut Silver badge

    They just don't get it.

    "As an advertising industry, we’ve done a very poor job of communicating to the end user as to why we’re tracking them..... , they should have the option to be able to opt-out"

    Try this instead

    "they should have the option to be able to OPT-IN"

    See, easy.

    1. Adelio

      Re: They just don't get it.

      Why would anyone want any company to profile them for ANY reason?

      1. Dinanziame Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: They just don't get it.

        I remember clicking on a "don't track me" button somewhere, and as a last-ditch effort, the website showed a message on the lines of: "Are you sure? We're going to show you ads anyway, we might as well try to show you something you're interested in instead of random crap"

        1. Muscleguy

          Re: They just don't get it.

          I had one of those recently. My experience of targeted advertising is throwing ads at me to buy more of the long lasting consumer durable I have just purchased. It’s witless.

          Just like predictive text. I’ve had my phone for about 4years now and it still can’t predict what I’m going to type. Some of the suggestions are not just laughable they are utterly ungrammatical. The correct part of speech for what precedes is the LAST option which comes up when I just have one more character to type.

          I only allow suggestions in the bar below, I cannot handle words writhing on the screen as I’m trying to type them and don’t get me started on autocorrect in places you can’t turn it off. Messages I get from family and others with autocorrected mistakes just confirm me in this.

          The algorithms are clearly still a work in progress. Wake me up when they work properly and can cope with someone who actually has a good vocabulary and knows how to use it.

          This stuff is still very much a work in progress.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Targetted advertising

            It's never of any interest / relevance to me, which may show that the information I "leak" is of so low quality that they can't find anything in it of any use.

            Or the algorithms are just useless.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Targetted advertising

              Going on lingerie sites and clicking around does get you scantily clad ladies on a lot of different websites, including The Register ...Or so I heard. *cough*

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Targetted advertising

                Sounds more fun than what I get -

                Ear wax cleaning - including photos.....

                I have absolutely no idea why or how I've ended up with that. At least it's only on my work's PC and not my home/mobile

                1. DiViDeD

                  Re: Targetted advertising

                  I'd have welcomed ear wax cleaning back in the day after my daughter, a keen Fat Boy Slim fan at the time, entered the search term "Happy Hardcore" into a search engine or two!

              2. DiViDeD

                Re: Targetted advertising

                Going on lingerie sites and clicking around

                It's heartening to see that the spirit of true inquiry is still alive in some small (and slightly moist) corner of the universe.

          2. rg287

            Re: They just don't get it.

            My experience of targeted advertising is throwing ads at me to buy more of the long lasting consumer durable I have just purchased. It’s witless.

            I get that from Amazon, which is bizarre, because they're not even trying to guess what I'm up to from arbitrary web trackers - they literally know what I've bought. A couple of years ago I acquired a Linx tablet, case and some styluses. The next two months of amazon emails were offering me... more tablets and cases. Because obviously having bought a tablet I'm immediately going to buy another, or a collection of cases for every occasion.

            Bizarre.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: They just don't get it.

              A few days ago SWMBO was trying to look up Pears Cyclopaedia on Amazon. I don't know if that actually came up but she was complaining about all the junk; I think there was even a girlie calendar on there. It doesn't bode well for this idea of Alexa trying to double-guess users the product.

            2. heyrick Silver badge

              Re: They just don't get it.

              Yup. I bought a shaver...

              ...and got spammed with adverts for shavers.

              Somebody really needs to understand the difference between consumables (like coffee pods and printer ink) and one offs (like shavers and tablets).

              More logical, even, would be to suggest spare shaver heads, cleaning kits, etc. But no. Just the dumbest lamest thing possible.

            3. Dimmer Bronze badge

              Re: They just don't get it.

              They just want you to know that you paid too much.

            4. Claptrap314 Silver badge

              Re: They just don't get it.

              What's even more interesting is that at least for a time, Amazon's various groups had to bid to make that suggestion to you--it cost them if you did not buy. Such a system should have eliminated such nonsense very quickly. The fact that it appears to persist implies that they no longer are using that system.

            5. BGatez

              Re: They just don't get it.

              I often can't find what I want on Amazon with explicit searches. Instead, I search on google which typically provides the links to the thing - on Amazon.

          3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: They just don't get it.

            "Just like predictive text."

            For a long time I've contrived to get auto-suggest out of the Google search. That no longer seems to work - an no, even if it gets rid of it I am not going to sign in to Google. So now the browser home page is DuckDuckGo. In the long run pissing off users doesn't do you any good.

        2. astounded1

          Re: They just don't get it.

          I have tried every different type of approach to root trackers out of my mobile devices and, when I get to the core, when I get the chance to opt out - they all say the same thing "If you do that, you'll get ads that are random, as opposed to ones that are customized to you. Are you sure you want to opt out?"

          I propose a new, radical option that should be included that will allow me to respond to the message that I'm going to be bombarded by ads anyway: "Instead of opting out of custom ads - I really want you to go fuck the right off."

      2. Mongrel

        Re: They just don't get it.

        Because most people don't appear to care and are happy to trade their privacy for a free Starbucks or a new chat app.

        Remember, we're not the 'normal' attitude.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: They just don't get it.

          Nevertheless I wonder what proportion of those in the advertising industry, including the actual advertisers don't block ads in their own browsers. I'm sure they all find ads annoying but don't actually connect this reaction to any possible audience response to what they do for a living.

      3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: They just don't get it.

        Marketing people are narcissists who are convinced the world is eagerly waiting for their next fart, brain or otherwise, so of course they think people want to be tracked to avoid any risk of being deprived.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They just don't get it.

      But they failed to explain "why this is beneficial" - forgetting to explain for whom. I'm sure it's extremely beneficial for their pockets, not beneficial at all for those who are tracked - since the very reason to do that is being able to extract as much money as possible from their pockets, when not something worse.

      If they can explain why it's beneficial, it should also be simple to make it to be opt-in, right? People will see the benefits and will opt in in droves, right?

      1. rg287

        Re: They just don't get it.

        not beneficial at all for those who are tracked

        Worse yet, it's not even beneficial for the advertisers or the content providers.

        NPO (the Dutch BBC) ditched targetted advertising in 2018 and went back to contextual advertising where you bid for ad space based on page content (e.g. a story about food or cars), the same as you would place an ad in a relevant paper or magazine. By not advertising to a user ("this person likes cars") they cut out a whole swathe of middle-men data brokers.

        The advertiser pays less per impression and NPO keeps more of that money. Their site loads faster and doesn't track users.

        Everybody who matters wins.

        1. ThatOne Silver badge
          Unhappy

          Re: They just don't get it.

          > contextual advertising

          That's the only halfway rational advertisement: If you read an article about cars, chances are you're somewhat interested in them. You read an article about babies, chances are you have some, or somebody close to you does.

          Problem is, what do you show to people visiting (for instance) a weather website? Ads about umbrellas or suntan lotion?... That's probably why they invented the "let's track said car fan across the internet" malarkey, and why they will never renounce trying to track their victims.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            "Problem is, what do you show to people visiting (for instance) a weather website?"

            Outdoor gear? Other gear based on the fact it's sea/lake/mountaints/etc. and season? Touristic ads about the location shown? Do they really believe people trying to understand if there is enough snow to sky next weekend (let's leave Covid aside for the moment) or if it's sunny for sailing across the lake are interested in buying a car?

            1. ThatOne Silver badge

              Re: "Problem is, what do you show to people visiting (for instance) a weather website?"

              > Outdoor gear?

              That might be an option, but much like touristic ads it would only work during vacations.

              Most people live/work in a big city (or at least in an urban environment), and just check the weather to know if they need to pack an umbrella and/or a heavy coat for those short walks between their car and some building.

              Also, in more rural settings, is the visitor a tourist wanting to know where to go and what to do, or is it a local inhabitant wanting to know if he needs to water his plants or shelter the garden furniture? Very different profiles, interested in very different things.

      2. tfewster
        Facepalm

        Re: They just don't get it.

        "why this is beneficial" - it reduces $COMPANY marketing costs, enabling us to fire our marketing staff and reduce the cost of the product to the consumer.

        I'd agree to personalised ads if they said that. Of course, I'd still block 'em.

    3. big_D Silver badge

      Re: They just don't get it.

      Exactly. The law says opt-in. If you are not giving them the choice or you are offering opt-out, you are breaking the law. Simples.

    4. Chris G

      Re: They just don't get it.

      I find a nice irony in the fact that the biggest suckers to buy a product as a result of advertising hype, are advertisers themselves.

      I doubt that targetted ads are ultimately any better than good advertising in general, the companies who benefit most from targetted advertising are those who sell it.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: They just don't get it.

        Of course. The only thing the advertising industry sells is advertising.

    5. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: They just don't get it.

      "As an advertising industry, we’ve done a very poor job of communicating to the end user as to why we’re tracking them, and why this is beneficial."

      Let me have a go - it's beneficial (to the advertiser) because it allows them to make more money by using personal data to profile individuals and target advertising at them.

      The problem is, that if you explain this to the "end user", who in this case, is the person about whom you are collecting personal information, they are, quite rightly, going to want you to get their consent first, and if they do understand what you're up to, they won't consent. If your whole business model is based on doing stuff behind people's backs and hoping they won't notice, I'm going to push the boat out here and suggest that maybe you shouldn't be in business.

      1. rg287

        Re: They just don't get it.

        Let me have a go - it's beneficial (to the advertiser) because it allows them to make more money by using personal data to profile individuals and target advertising at them.

        No, as it turns out, it's not even beneficial for the advertisers (much less the content providers).

        NPO (the Dutch BBC) ditched targetted advertising in 2018 and went back to contextual advertising where you bid for ad space based on page content (e.g. a story about food or cars), the same as you would place an ad in a relevant paper or magazine. By not advertising to a user ("bid to advertise to this 20-30yo male user who likes cars") they cut out a whole swathe of middle-men data brokers.

        Advertisers swarmed to them. The advertiser pays less per impression whilst NPO keeps more of that money. Their site loads faster and doesn't track users.

        Everybody who matters wins.

        1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: They just don't get it.

          Yes, more accurately, it's beneficial to the people selling the targeted advertising to the advertisers.

          Also, it's arguable that the "end user" isn't the person receiving the adverts, but the one buying the advertising "space".

        2. croxed

          Re: They just don't get it.

          I still love this cartoon that captures why we find this sort of tracking to sell personalised advertising so creepy https://marketoonist.com/2014/05/personaldat.html

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: They just don't get it.

        "Let me have a go - it's beneficial (to the advertiser) because it allows them to make more money by using personal data to profile individuals and target advertising at them."

        No. It's beneficial to the advertising industry because it enables them to sell these targeting services to advertisers. As we're all aware this results in advertisers being charged for adverts and the targeting service to punters who've either (a) already bought what the advertiser's trying to flog and don't need another or (b) are being targeted with something quite irrelevant because of the quirks of the AI/ML algorithm whose results are irrelevant but can't be explained because it's a black box.

        The advertisers are the mugs in this game.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Boffin

      Re: They just don't get it.

      With tracking: "Hi consumer! You have just purchased a power drill! Here are more adverts for power drills!"

      Without tracking: "Here are more adverts!"

      With ad-blocker: "[...]"

      Track away, marketing tapeworms, track away. Whatever, I never see your ads.

      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

        Re: They just don't get it.

        I recently had occasion to buy a new toaster, after one of the elements burned out on the 25-year-old one I had from when I was a student (it wasn't economical to fix). After shopping around to find a suitable replacement at a decent price, I settled on one and purchased it from a well-known web retailer.

        Cue several emails from eBay over the next month or so asking if I'm still interested in toasters, as well as ones from Wayfair touting their range of bread-heating devices. Now, it might be fair to class me as a weirdo, but I'm not the sort of weirdo that collects toasters.

        So even though I'm using an ad-blocker, and NoScript, these fuckers are still using tracking cookies, none of which I recall opting into - I generally try to decline permissions for these as much as possible.

        Quite often I'll see adverts on Facebook for things I've recently been looking at on other sites as well. Facebook is notoriously sneaky with its adverts, and seems to be able to sneak them into your "feed" despite using an ad blocker.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: They just don't get it.

          And all these adverts and all this 'cleverness' from idiot marketing scumbags has done is irritate you, making you far less willing to purchase.

        2. Electronics'R'Us
          Go

          Re: They just don't get it.

          Firefox has a really great add-on.

          Containers (with one specifically for facebook). The facebook container prevents scripts from facebook running and dropping cookies on you unless you are specifically on facebook so all those facebook share icons (which have scripts behind them) are effectively neutered.

          The newer containers is a more general extension of that.

        3. Alumoi Silver badge

          Re: They just don't get it.

          I bet you don't clear cookies/history when you close the browser/tab. And you're using Chrome. And permit the browser to use offline storage. Right?

          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Re: They just don't get it.

            Nope, not using Chrome. Try again. Also, in terms of "offline storage", it's not permitted to do anything other than store the cookies from a site, which, according to EU law, should get my consent first.

        4. Colin Wilson 2

          Re: They just don't get it.

          I suppose their thinking goes something like....

          - You love your new toaster, so you're going to buy more of them - to give to all your friends.

          or...

          - You hate your new toaster - so you're going to want to replace it.

          Either way you *need* some adverts!

          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Re: They just don't get it.

            I think, for eBay at least, their thinking is, "you looked at it once, so you must want to buy it."

            The thing is, for most page views, I'm either not going to buy it, am going to buy it elsewhere, or have already bought one. Quite often it will be when looking for the best price to buy something for someone else, so profiling my "preferences" for musicians I don't like, or for women's clothes* isn't exactly going to help them.

            *Insert appropriate "only at weekends," "call me Sandra," etc. etc. joke here.

      2. DiViDeD

        Re: They just don't get it.

        I had the misfortune to use a colleagues PC recently - it was like suddenly finding myself in the 90s! Ads on every bit of whitespace, crawlers blocking the article I was trying to read, even popunders yelling at me invisibly!

        I was forcibly reminded of the horror that my blockers are protecting me from, and it wasn't pretty.

    7. Electronics'R'Us
      Megaphone

      Re: They just don't get it.

      "they should have the option to be able to OPT-IN"

      Precisely.

      I look at this from the perspective of a real set of shops and articles.

      I can go to a library and read a few articles; now I head to a newsagent. How would you feel if they said to you "We know you have been reading <list of books at library> and we might suggest <x>".

      Now the only way they could know this is if either the library told them or someone was watching my every move. User profiling is, by far, the latter.

      If someone did that in real life (followed me around shops watching my every move) it would be classified as stalking.

      On that subject, El Reg, it is really none of your business that I occasionally browse electronics component vendor sites (see name) so quit serving ads that show their products (or quit using the ad spamming service that does so). I deliberately keep those specific cookies for ease of login, not so an ad spamming service can sling an ad at me that is a total waste of money because I am going to ignore the ad as I get the newsletters anyway.

      I have no problem with a site serving ads that have products that pertain to the site main contents; I have a real problem with a site serving ads based on what other sites I visit.

      Of course, if sites were forced to adhere to that rule, a lot of people might actually have to get a real job.

  2. don't you hate it when you lose your account

    Yes but

    No but yes but no. Makes perfect sense

  3. Khaptain Silver badge
    Pint

    Gotta love this dude

    I have no idea who this guy is in real life but he definitely has a King Kong sized pair. ( insert your own definition of a pair )..

    Max is punching them where it hurts and they apparently don't have a leg to stand on without making fools of themselves...

    Three cheers for Max.

    1. mevets

      Re: Gotta love this dude

      A few cheers for the EU are in order too! You certainly won't see North American governments passing laws to protect personal freedom. Just a hand over the heart and salute the flag.

  4. Tom 7

    What we need is a new cookie monster.

    Not one that eats cookies but one that eats just enough of them to make them taste really bad with apple sauce.

    Other evil empires exist.

    Can it be bad to totally screw up their advertising targeting?

    1. cookieMonster Silver badge

      Re: What we need is a new cookie monster.

      Oi, I resent that... I think

      :-)

  5. Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse

    It's this...

    Dear advertising industry, it's this sort of bollocks below that makes us all feel as though you are a lower form of life than pond scum...

    "As an advertising industry, we’ve done a very poor job of communicating to the end user as to why we’re tracking them, and why this is beneficial... Few consumers understand how any of this works, and with lack of understanding it’s simple to just say no and block it. Importantly though, they should have the option to be able to opt-out."

    1. Please explain who it is beneficial to. It is certainly not beneficial to me and I will continue to block all ads using all tools available.

    2. The reason few consumers understand it is because it has been designed to be as opaque as possible.

    3. I'd like to point out that I should have the option to opt-in. Not that I would.

    Thanks.

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: It's this...

      Dear advertising industry, it's this sort of bollocks below that makes us all feel as though you are a lower form of life than pond scum

      Pond scum is just the relatively benign stuff that floats to the top. They're the stinking oozing stagnant mud at the bottom of the pond, where the crawling and writhing things live.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's this...

        ...and beneath all that, living off the faeces of the crawling and writhing things, are the ad-twats.

  6. Muscleguy

    Just say no

    I have a longstanding policy NEVER to buy goods or services from ads intruding where I don’t want them. Take that advertising industry. I HATE ads, take steps not to see them and regard ads as reasons NOT to buy things. I’m capable of doing research before buying things and even if triggered to look by an ad I am not going to take your word for it.

    So just sling dough at Google searches so I’ll see your site. Though I’m very price conscious at the moment so if you aren’t cheap, sorry, no sale.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just say no

      Ads themselves are not bad as long as they are not intrusive. Tracking and data gathering is always intrusive. I don't mind about sites who have ads here and there as long as they don't track me. I'm not interested in targeted ads, they have really no clue about what I may need, and as in financial ads, my past performance are not indicative of future results. Show me a random ad and you may have better chances to make me interested. Or just use the context - I'm here on The Register, so maybe I'm interested in some topics?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just say no

        Similar - I understand that some web sites get money from displaying ads, and as long as the ads aren't too intrusive, I don't mind - might even click on a few on random. Rather that then pay to access the website.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just say no

        One problem with site-context-based ads.... What sort of horrors do you think we'd be served up as typical Reg readers?!

        1. Strahd Ivarius Silver badge
          Joke

          Re: Just say no

          Ads for complotist sites about martian islamist reptiles trying to impose a COVID vaccine through the use of extreme right RFID chips distributed over 5G networks?

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Just say no

            You mean you're not getting those already?

          2. Graham Lockley

            Re: Just say no

            So you've been vistiting NaturalNews as well then. Wonderful site, has the same effect on your brain as a pound of hash but its free!!

            1. Zolko Silver badge
              Pirate

              Re: Just say no

              "So you've been vistiting NaturalNews as well then"

              wow ... I had the impression to be reading extreme stuff on ZeroHedge, but this is far wilder.

        2. ThatOne Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: Just say no

          > What sort of horrors do you think we'd be served up as typical Reg readers?!

          Why, typical nerd stuff I'd expect, and I would even expect it to be quite efficient. Few people here would resist some new cool high-tech gadget... :-p

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Happy

          Re: Just say no

          I agree contextual ads should be disabled on Mr. Dabbs columns and BOFH ones - I might be a bit uncomfortable when displayed ads about Dabbs' double-entendres, or BOFH-approved carpets and concrete mix....

        4. Stoneshop
          Devil

          What sort of horrors do you think we'd be served up?

          Ads from Carpetland and Lincolnshire Lime? Doesn't sound that horrible to me.

          Oh, and Armitage Shanks, after reading one of Dabbsy's

        5. Dave559 Silver badge

          Re: Just say no

          "One problem with site-context-based ads.... What sort of horrors do you think we'd be served up as typical Reg readers?!"

          Why, carpets, spades, and cheap quicklime supplies, of course!

          (And possibly also assorted tech gadgets.)

  7. NetBlackOps

    I purposely wipe out all traces of local storage, cookies, browsing history, ... before I go shopping just to prevent the industry trying to leverage anything aabout me in the prices of goods. It's really interesting the change that makes in the prices I see. I'd definitely not shop using an Apple device given the existence of this identifier.

    1. alain williams Silver badge

      Price comparison sites

      I purposely wipe out all traces of local storage, cookies, browsing history, ... before I go shopping just to prevent the industry trying to leverage anything aabout me in the prices of goods.

      Even better: run up a virtual machine and go shopping in a clean browser.

      This is what I do when I am comparing prices. See what there is (eg hotels) using a price comparison site and then book a room with the hotel directly -- which saves them the 20% that a comparison site would extract.

      1. Sleep deprived

        Re: Price comparison sites

        Hum, I recall standing at a hotel desk booking a room online because the site was giving us a 20% discount the attendant couldn't. We.then handed the phone to her to claim our reservation. Silky.

      2. Zakhar

        Re: Price comparison sites

        A VM is not enough to protect you. With canvas fingerprinting, you'll have the same result on your machine whether in or out of the VM... I was quite impressed. Obviously you can also be betrayed by your IP address or other things. If you always use the same browser in your VM, it's also easy to fingerprint. A better defense would be to start a Linux live ISO, the more popular the better, in your VM, so that it resembles any other person running the same Linux ISO... apart from IP, canvas fingerprinting, etc...

        The techniques of advertisers and responses of browsers (at least freedom conscious like Firefox) seems like an infinite race.

        1. Falmari Silver badge

          Re: Price comparison sites

          Wow I never heard of canvas fingerprinting before interesting. Though it looks like running a different os and browser will beat it.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "I purposely wipe out all traces of local storage, cookies, browsing history"

      I have a browser set to wipe all storage on exit for this purpose or for any site that seems too keen on Javascript. It seems to get used more and more often.

  8. TWB

    Wasting their time

    I do wonder what the advertisers would make of me. I'm not that knowledgable about data privacy but seem to avoid most targeted ads - I don't use my phone to buy stuff and was able to turn a lot of the google stuff off. On my comps I use Brave as my preferred browser and rarely see ads - if any - for stuff even vaguely interesting to me - maybe I'm going to the wrong (or right) sites?

    I think the advertising world is wasting a lot of money and doing it all wrong - or maybe it works for the 98% of the population who would happily click 'Kill my children' to get a pop up banner out of the way.

    Maybe not being on facebook, twitter etc helps.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Wasting their time

      "I think the advertising world is wasting a lot of money and doing it all wrong"

      That's what you think, yet they keep spending money. Are you sure adverts aren't affecting your purchasing decisions, and you just don't realise it?

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Wasting their time

        How often do we have to say this: The only thing the advertising industry sells is advertising.

        They sell it to advertisers. Providing they can sell that successfully they're home and dry. As far as they're concerned it doesn't matter if the advertisers waste money because that wasted money ends up in their pockets.

        1. MOH

          Re: Wasting their time

          And the other side nobody ever really considers is that the advertisers bake the cost of advertising into their product/service, so ultimately we (collectively) and up paying the advertising industry anyway.

          The fact everyone get 50 useless ads for toasters after they just bought one contributes towards the price of toasters all round.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wasting their time

        I keep finding myself driving an amazing hybrid car over a very long bridge into a desert where I bury something random then collect a gorgeous girl with lovely long ringlets in her super-luxurious hair. All while staring at a blackcurrant.

        No. Their not wasting their time.

        1. Circadian
          FAIL

          Re: Wasting their time

          @Anonymous Coward

          Uh, wha-thu-fukkk?

          That made no sense to me. What was truly a waste of money, though, was that spent on your education (try “they are” rather than “their”).

  9. daalmo

    95% Don't Care

    Came across some consent stats recently and 95% of users simply click the Agree button. No one can be bothered going layers deep to adjust settings which are rarely GDPR compliant anyways...

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: 95% Don't Care

      Which is exactly why it should be clearly, and explicitly opt in. And that doesn't mean with one giant "yes" button, and a tiny grey link to a page where you can click the no button after scrolling through pages of text.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: 95% Don't Care

      I don't think that the changing the options works most of the time. That and there are many websites where it deliberately isn't clear if the "on/off" toggles mean "allow cookies" or "block cookies".

  10. iron Silver badge

    > Few consumers understand how any of this works, and with lack of understanding it’s simple to just say no and block it.

    And with understanding it becomes necessary to say "HELL NO!" and block it.

    1. My-Handle

      This is what I do. I don't like the idea of ads being thrown at me left, right and centre even more than I don't like the idea of being tracked across all of space and time. I try my best to contribute to the content I consume on a regular basis, but ad networks are flat-out blocked.

      Some sites have fallen back on an old form of advertising, where they directly negotiate with the advertiser and place a banner or link directly on their site. By and large, I don't have a problem with this. The adverts are usually more reserved in how they are implemented and some effort has usually been taken to integrate them into the site in a sensible way. These ads usually slip through an ad-blocker's net and for the time being I'm happy for that to continue.

      On the other end of the spectrum, we have sites that refuse to show anything if you've got an ad-blocker. Which to me, as a web developer, is just cute.

      1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

        Which to me, as a web developer, is just cute.

        I'm all for helping non-technical users with how to use the console to inspect page elements to set their properties to hide those "ad blocker" banners.

        Usually involves setting "display:none" on the top element, and possibly removing properties that disable scrolling.

        I'd rather do that than have advertising gunk spewed in my face.

        1. My-Handle

          True, but it can be fiddly. Most sites have a couple of layers for the "ad-blocker blocker" notice (the lightbox itself and the dimout layer behind it). A lot of them also set the overflow property of the main site container to hidden rather than scroll, so you have to dig around to find out which element is being limited (most often the body tag, but not always). And then there's the continuous niggle that you have to repeat the process every time you refresh the browser or navigate to a new page.

          I'd say it's useful knowledge for getting one thing off a website (a product review or news report), but otherwise it's best to avoid sites like that.

          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

            Indeed. What you have described pretty much exactly matches what the Independent's current "ad-blocker-blocker" incarnation does. They should stop kidding themselves that complaining about ad-blockers will magically make people decide that they both want to see the adverts, and that they will deliberately follow them.

            I, for one, wish there was an easy way to save such edits as a domain specific stylesheet that the browser would then use in subsequent loads. If there is such a thing, it's well hidden, in Firefox at least.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              "They should stop kidding themselves that complaining about ad-blockers will magically make people decide that they both want to see the adverts, and that they will deliberately follow them."

              They're not interested in that. All they're interested in is getting money from the advertiser for shoving the ad in people's faces. If the advertiser loses money by that it's not their problem.

            2. Evil Scot
              Linux

              Oh the independent

              Given up with their site.

              Oh do please ad us to your list of trusted sites.

              I might trust you, my browser might trust you but my network does not.

              So shove that down your cake hole.

              Or Pie to the left pondian.

          2. Aussie Doc
            Mushroom

            Re:

            uBlock Origin allows you to block individual elements with ease, if that helps.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "The adverts are usually more reserved in how they are implemented and some effort has usually been taken to integrate them into the site in a sensible way. "

        They're also more likely to be relevant to the page the viewer has chosen to read.

  11. Stuart Castle Silver badge

    First, I don't like Advertising tracking. TBH, I don't really believe it benefits the consumer. I know that theoretically, the tracking allows the advertisers to try and sell you stuff you might want, but guess what? It rarely works, and if I am looking to buy something, I'm more than capable of searching for it it myself. Where I do allow tracking, the ads, more often that not, try and sell me another of an item I have just bought or searched for. They ignore the fact that if I want or need more than one of an item when I buy it, I will buy more than one. They also ignore the fact that just because I am searching for an item does not mean I am planning (or even able) to purchase that item. Thus presenting hundreds of ads for similar items isn't likely to persuade me to buy one of them.

    However, I don't block the adverts. Why? Because I run a small forum site. We have a couple of thousand users, and while I don't handle the finances, I know that the Google ads on the site pay for the site's costs, with a tiny profit (about £100 a year). There are a lot of small sites financed like this, and if I use one, I don't want to deprive the site owner of potentially much needed income. I do, however, ignore the ads. Even the big sites have costs

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    On the front page of the Reg is written:

    "Wondering how AI and 5G are set to change your world?"

    My answer? no.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Advertising Execs home addresses first

    THEN you might get to track me.

    Might.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wasn't this the replacement to the IMEI number

    I thought this token was introduced when Apple restricted access to the phone's IMEI? IIRC you can switch it off in settings.

  15. TaabuTheCat

    You used to be able to reset the advertising ID...

    And then iOS 14 came along. So they took away functionality (well hidden, but still there) that allowed you to enforce some degree of control, but now it's gone. So much for Apple protecting your privacy. Yeah, right.

  16. s. pam Silver badge
    Headmaster

    Just do a daily IDFA reset

    In Settings you can reset the Apple tracker.

    We do it almost daily.

    Screw the advertisers.

    1. Alumoi Silver badge

      Re: Just do a daily IDFA reset

      Ad-man: hmm, Iphone no.xxxx just changed its IDFA. Minions, add new IDFA to user's profile.

  17. Zakhar

    But to be the advocate of the devil

    If there were no ads, you won't have "free" stuff like: search engines (without which the internet is pretty useless), e-mail service, etc...

    Are you too young to remember times when e-mails service had to be paid for. It is still current practice to have this service with your ISP, and you pay for it with your subscription. Now you see, you have Proton Mail that "sells it" with the benefit of encryption. Of course encrypting your e-mail (with the likes of PGP) does not work with ads, that's why it has never been made widely available by any of the GAFA, and why Proton mail can sell it!

    So yes, ads is a "business model" for those things that are almost "basic commodities" (like e-mail) but still have a cost: machines, storage, network, programs...

    "There is no such thing as a free lunch"

    So you should honestly ask yourself if you prefer some "free" service in exchange for a "reasonable" amount of ads, or prefer to pay for it and have no ad at all.

    The whole debate in fact is in the "reasonable" level of ads. Once they ad makers are in, greed tends to become less "reasonable".

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      Re: But to be the advocate of the devil

      I stopped reading your comment after the first sentence, because it is demonstrably wrong.

      The "main" search engine that people use didn't used to spew adverts at you, back in its early incarnations, and other search engines exist that don't advertise, or track you in any way, for instance DuckDuckGo. To claim that the internet "couldn't exist" without advertising conveniently ignores the counter-examples.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "didn't used to spew adverts at you, back in its early incarnations"

        And it wasn't making money either. So investors sent Schmidt in to start making real money. Google had no real business model to sustain its search engine growth.

        DuckDuckGo AFAIK piggybacks on another search engine, so it can reduce costs. Sure ads are not the only source of revenues, but are an easy one - look at how large and rich both Google and Facebook became selling ads places to advertisers, while offering very simple products, mostly built with someone else's technology.

        There's a reason I run my own mail server and yes, I pay to run it. Without advertising companies the Internet would still exist, but would be quite different. Probably even better. More expensive, though.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: But to be the advocate of the devil

        "Are you too young to remember times when e-mails service had to be paid for."

        I got as far as this. I pay for an email service on which I can set up and tear down email addresses as needed for anything important. I still have an old Hotmail address and that's the one that gets the genuine* phishing attempts - although MS are fairly good at trapping most of them some get through and a surprising proportion are those pretending to be from themselves.

        *My bank, building society and even local council keep arranging to have what look like phishing emails sent by 3rd parties impersonating themselves. The closest thing for authentication is that they arrive at the correct email address.

        Let me correct that - I can exclude the bank because I told them a few years ago that if they wouldn't authenticate emails I sent to their address for reporting phishing I'd close down the address. They didn't so I did.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But to be the advocate of the devil

      or prefer to pay for it and have no ad at all

      Funny you should mention it. HBO started as pay a little see no ads. Then it was pay a little more see some ads. Now it's pay even more and see more ads with the benefit of crappier selection.

      As long as they can shovel ads in our faces they won't stop.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: But to be the advocate of the devil

        "As long as they can shovel ads in our faces"

        Which is exactly as long as you tolerate it by paying them.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Zakhar - Re: But to be the advocate of the devil

      Now if you mention the early days of the Internet, yes there were ads but not this obsession of tracking every move you make, every breath you tke etc.

      I have nothing against ads (although YouTube has just become extremely obnoxious these days) but no way in hell I will accept this tracking without fighting back.

  18. WhiteDragon43

    Pi-Hole

    Surprised no one has mentioned the excellent use of a Raspberry Pi hooked into the router and blacklisting all the annoying advertising crud that litters up so many web sites. I am currently setting up one which makes use of a dust gathering 2B.

    https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/pi-hole-raspberry-pi/

    https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/pi-hole-ftl-v5-2-released/36964

    Bit tongue - in - cheek the FTL (Faster than Light)

  19. Sparkus

    Seem as though the more expensive phones are the worse at this....

    And my US$ 250 Motos have stock android, no ads, no contract. IP-something water proofing and a 2 year guarantee.

    I can buy a new phone every two years for 4-5 years for the price of a 'flagship' phone..........

  20. Richard Gray 1
    Stop

    Legitimate Interest - just Foxtrot Oscar

    After regularly going through the opt out of advertising that now seems to appear on every sodding page, only to find out that you can opt in all, but need to de select each one separately, they have now come up with "Legitimate Interest".

    Look I've already told you to piss right off that means your DON'T HAVE ANY legitimate interest to me or my data. I don't care what you think you want, that appears on a quick read through to be almost exactly what you would have got if I'd opted in for your crap.

    Can we not just enforce an API that you can set on your browser to choose at a browser level if you want to opt in, if you want to opt in for a specific company and the data you're willing to share.

    Then No means No. and you can't have any sneaky tricks like making it hard to object to the legitimate interest by killing the pop up box after you've opted out of the targeted, but without being able to see if the legitimate interest has opted out too.

  21. astounded1

    The Best Auto Response Ever - Only Because It Feels Good

    After layers and layers of digging, I found out that opting out doesn't stop the ads.

    So, I created my own "Go Fuck Off" message to send over to any advertiser who sends me shit I don't want. Which is almost all of them. I go to an advertiser's webpage, find the appropriate email address for info on a specific product. I log the address and when the ads for women's clothing from Golily keep showing up on my iPhone and iPad, I pull up the email I have for them and auto generate this:

    "I'm a middle aged man and though I am quite fit, I do not believe I would look good in any of your clothes that are in the ads you keep sending me. So, Go Fuck Off."

    It doesn't stop the ads, but I think someone might see my message, and that makes me smile.

  22. Claverhouse Silver badge
    Devil

    And They Say The Golden Age Of Comedy Is Over...

    COO of adtech company TrafficGuard, Luke Taylor, noted: "As an advertising industry, we’ve done a very poor job of communicating to the end user as to why we’re tracking them, and why this is beneficial...

  23. Claptrap314 Silver badge

    Privacy, yes, but badware--much, much, more

    As annoying as the privacy implications are, I really don't see them as the biggest concern.

    Code that compromises the integrity of my system is far, far worse. That's not a theoretically "is my tin hat working" kind of problem, that's a real, live, someone is about to give me a REALLY bad day kind of problem. And ads have become a (or the?) primary vector for badware getting on my machine. The reason is (mostly) that these ad platforms are architecturally unpolicable.

    I don't mind ads, and I don't even mind a website aggressively keeping up with what I'm doing on that particular website. But I cannot have the badware. So I run uMatrix. And I very, very rarely see ads. Which makes me feel bad for sites like El Reg. But there is a simple way for them to get past uMatrix--and it involves them taking direct responsibility for the ads that I see.

  24. Sandgrounder

    Advertising does work

    So many claims on here that advertising does not work made by no doubt very clever people who can sidestep most of the tracking. You must all be so much smarter than those dumb business people who buy ads.

    Yet many of those dumb business people make an awful lot of money selling stuff. And they keep buying the ads too.

    Advertising doesn't work? Really? Who are the people being dumb now?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like