Adverts now on marketplace GRRR

[Phil Deakins]

I forgot about another bit of data that 3rd parties get - your user-agent (browser).

When you get a webpage or a file from a server, one line is recorded in the server's logfile. The line is made up of various bits of data, some of which relate to you. The parts that relate to you are your IP address, the URL of the page the request came from, and your user-agent (browser). That's all. No other data about you is passed to the server.

If you click a link on a page, the URL that is passed is the URL of the page you are leaving. If a page requires a graphic file or an ad file, then the URL that is passed is the URL of the page that requires the file. An affiliate ad is a file that is fetched from a 3rd party server, and, in this case, the page requesting it is an LL page.

A 3rd party, such as an affiliate advertising center, can store that data about you. They can record other pages on the web that you visit, but only pages that also fetch a file from that 3rd party server. They can't track you across the web. The only way you can be tracked everywhere is if you have a 3rd party toolbar installed in your browser. The Google toolbar, for instance. It's the toolbar that does the tracking.

The possible deductions you suggested are mostly correct. But the question they raise is, so what? :-

1. Your IP address is irrelevant because you give it to every site you visit on the web. The only ways to opt out of that are by getting off the web altogether, or by using a proxy server - but then the proxy owner will then have your IP address. So forget about your IP address.

2. So what if you read english?

3. One of the URLs does appear to show that you have some financial dealing with the SL site, but it doesn't show that you have any money. That deduction is incorrect. Also, everyone has some money (not necessarilty in that account ), so who cares is someone else realises that you have some money?

4. So you are interested in virtual boots but not expensive ones. So what?

5. As far as I know, the only way to get your account name from the forum's user-id number is to use it to look up your profile - but I'm not sure about that. Either way, your username public anyway, and I really can't see any benefit to an affiliate center in knowing that 16 is interested in virtual boots that sell for less than $2 And what affiliate center is going to be interested enough to make a special effort to convert a user-id number into a username of someone in Second Life? (It would have to be special effort to get that information).

The latter part of your post is more realistic. Profiles of people who use the web are built up by 3rd parties. Doubleclick has been doing it for many years. One of Google's founders was big into data-mining, so it's extremely likely that Google has also been doing it for many years - probably at least as long as Doubleclick. (Google now owns Doubleclick, incidentally).

But it's not a bad thing and the experience you described is the reason. If ads come my way, it is better for me if they advertise things that interest me. That's the reason for gathering the information - to advertise things that the individual is interested in. That's good, not bad.

And don't forget - advertising is good and positive. It is not bad or negative. So personalised advertising is even better, and that's what the gathering of information by ad centers is all about.

We don't know how LL has set up the affiliate ads. If the URLs you showed are the ones that are sent to the 3rd party, then some irrelevant deductions can be made from them - IF the 3rd party thinks it's worthy of a special effort. If I were a boot seller in SL, I might make that effort, but if I'm Google/Doubleclick, I wouldn't because trageting buyers of virtual goods is much too small. I might profile you as being interested in virtual realities though, and target ads about that to you, but I'd only need the secondlife domain name in the URL to add that to your profile.

[Charolotte Caxton]

Lol

[Phil Deakins]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I think Phil has written that he did once do a lot of work with internet data mining/advertising/that sort of thing, so I'll just read both of your perspectives and learn. But it's no use you trying to ignore things by posting to unrelated topics.

---

I've never done any data-mining. I was an SEO until SL captured me, but my experiences for this thread's topic is that I've dealt with affiliate ads on my sites for many years. I've even had sites containing nothing but affiliate ads. In the past I made a lot of money from them but, as with everything I do, my interest wore thin over time, and now I just get a smallish monthly amount from them because I stopped keeping up with them. You have to maintain top search rankings to do well, and I lost interest in keeping up with the ever-changing search engines.

Just for the interest...

There is a lot of money to be made from it though. It's time has not passed. It's not even essential to be able to get top search rankings, although that ability is the best way. There are people making plenty of money by arbitraging the ads. For instance, the ads on the right side of the Google search results are called AdWords. The AdWords advertiser pays Google an agreed amount every time someone clicks on the ad. Now, suppose I, as a non-seller, take out an AdWords ad and, when someone clicks on it, they go to my page, on which are more Google ads. AdSense ads. I have to pay Google for the click but, if the ads on my page are selected to be high-paying per click, then I can make a nice profit. There are people making loads of money by doing exactly that. And Google doesn't mind. It sounds like something that Google wouldn't allow, but they specifically stated that they allow it.

I once set up a system that worked with a smaller search engine. All the results were ads - no organic results at all. In some fields, advertisers pay a lot for a click - gambling sites is one such field. The more you pay per click, the higher you rank in the results. What I did was select one of the top paying gambling ads and advertise the same ad a little lower down. It wasn't much lower down but the cost per click was a lot less. When someone clicked on my ad, my server received the page request from the engine, it then did another search on the engine for the same searchterm, selected the equivalent high-paying ad from the results, did an auito-click on the one I was copying, and sent the user to the high-paying advertiser's site. The result was that I paid a low amount for the click on my ad, and I was paid my affiliate share for the click on the high-paying ad. The user got to where s/he wanted to go, the engine got paid twice, the high-paying advertiser paid what s/he expected to pay and got the user to the site. Everyone was a winner.

Things like the above do need hands-on though. There is plenty of money to be made from it but it does need to be watched. In the second example (my system) I didn't last long doing it because it needed watching too much. The amount an advertiser pays for a clickthrough often changes - sometimes daily. It took too much watching over so I stopped it. I don't think the Google-type arbitrage scheme is as active in terms of those changes but it would still need careful watching.

 

[Phil Deakins]

I'm afraid I don't agree that the 2 reasons you gave are valid reasons for openly objecting to websites including affiliate ads.

About your first reason: The world is full of ads. Accepting that fact is the only realistic option, and everyone has the choice of using an ad blocker for the web, so web ads don't have to be seen if a person doesn't want to see them. What you wrote isn't a vaild reason for openly objectging to ads on the web.

About your second reason: As you sai, TV advertising is fine, but not because it's often targeted. It's because it pays for TV programmes to be made and channels to broadcast them on. Your internet advertising attitude sounds a bit paranoid to me. If you don't want your privacy to be "completely demolished" (your words), you really must get off the internet altogether. But that lack of total privacy has nothing to do with advertising, except that it facilitates the ads you see to be targeted to you personally. That's the very thing that you thought was ok about TV advertising. So your second point is about privacy and not about advertising, and, therefore, it isn't a reason for objecting to the ads.

Finally: Objecting to advertising is unrealistic and, therefore, invalid as an open objection. Disliking them is fine, and taking steps to avoid them is fine, but publically objecting to advertising is simply an invalid objection.

[161488303349]

I just list the SL urls to show my understanding of how IP profiling is done. you confirm yes. so that parts ok

+

the thing for me isn't about the advertisments. its about the change in lindens approach about who they share our info with.

up til now has been nobody outside. like 3rd parties. not on an individual account level they haven't. this is new

has always been an ability to associate an IP address with my account name. like inworld. MOAP etc. but I have the say over that. like can go or not go onto a parcel. can turn off Media as well if I want

is not the adverts themselves that the concern. it the passing of my info to the 3rd party when I login to the website. this I cant choose

the opportunity for a 3rd party to know what my account name is, and what I search/buy on the SL marketplace is now potential possible

and is also possible for that to be associated with my RL IP profile. i not particularly care about this personal. but some people will be. specially people who into adult play which they maybe not want any 3rd party to know about

is why i raised it. just hope that linden think this through carefully. they say they are so am take their word for it

+

on google

they the biggest advert firm ever. they also want to know everything about everyone and everything. is their stated goal as a company. so its not like they not going to grab everything they can. they will. is what they do

 

if linden go ahead full steam  with allowing google to mine us while we logged into the secondlife website then people are going to think carefully about that. as it affect them personally

their options being: 1) don't care. 2) am not going to login to the website. meaning am not going to buy stuff on the marketplace that might end up embarrass me RL

i think for linden and residents individually the number that will matter the most in the end is 2)

+

about the embarrassment. i give an example

just say that i am into adult pony play in SL. just say for example. and i buy this kind of stuff on the MP. and is captured and stored against my IP profile by the 3rd party. say google for example

is going to be a potential problem for me if am helping my child say with their homework and we googling for animals. bc they doing a school homework on animals

is tenuous this. remote possibilities. farfetched even maybe. but is something i would worry about if i was into adult pony play. no matter how tenuous or remote or farfetched it might be

+

edit add:

i probably also worry a bit if i was a creator of adult products selling the marketplace .i might have to go inworld store again

 

 

[Drake1 Nightfire]

Would you prefer they raise tier fees? How about a bigger bite of our profits? Big whoop, they have ads on the MP.. can you name any other marketplace type site that doesn't have ads? Get an ad blocker and move on.

[Phil Deakins]

You are reading far too much into it, 16. For instance, no 3rd party can know what you buy on the marketplace. They may or may not be able to know that you looked at virtual ponies, but that's all.

The overall effect of 3rd parties gathering the small amount of data that's available to them, is that you personally will sometimes receive advertisements that are tailored to your interests, and there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, there's everything good with that. The scenario where an adult visits porn sites, and then, when children are watching, visits other sites and receives ads that advertise adult stuff, is tough. If anyone is in the position of risking that, they should use an an blocker so they won't be embarrassed.

The SL site is no difdferent to any other site you visit. Every site you visit can know roughly where you are in the world (from your IP address), but they can't get your name, your gender, you age, etc. etc. etc. They can know what browser you use, and they can know which webpage you were viewing. All that is common to every website you visit. Everything you've said about what can infered from URLs is common to every website you visit. It's just the way thing are, and all anyone can do is accept it.

Making use of the small amount of data that every website owner can have about you is for everyone's benefit. It's for your benefit because you will occasionally receive ads about things that you're interested in, and it's for the advertisers' benefit because they will get to show ads to people who have an interest in what they are advertising. It's a win all round. Anyone who doesn't like it can opt out. Personally, I think it's good.

[Perrie Juran]

 

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

.....The overall effect of 3rd parties gathering the small amount of data that's available to them, is that you personally will sometimes receive advertisements that are tailored to your interests.....,

 

---

I'd like to correct this one statement.  They are not tailoring the Ads to my interests, they are tailoring the ads to what THEY think I am interested in and what THEY think they can capitalize on.

Three weeks ago I checked a review on a camera lens and even priced it (too expensive IMO).  Since then the ads for camera lenses have been non stop when I browse the web.  And I really have no interest in this lens and it has reached the point that I am finding it very annoying.  But they sure keep pushing it on me.

As to the above video, it was a big eye opener to me.  Because people think when they search for information on the Web, that the search results they get are unbiased.  It is sadly so far from the truth it actually scares me as more and more people continue to turn to the Internet as their primary source for information.

Any one that hasn't watched it, at least IMO, it is worth the ten minutes of your time.

[Perrie Juran]

Commenting in general now, not to any one specific.  I posted this in the Merchants thread also.

Ads don't bother me per se, I've come to accept them (have I been brain washed?) as a part of the Internet.  It's what pays for the content I get to enjoy so freely, and over all I accept the trade off.

One of the things some of us or possibly even many of us loved about SL when I started was that it was basically free of corporate taint.  For the most part, at least as it appeared to me, very few were buying virtual Nike running shoes or Toyota's to drive around the Grid in.  Some of us, and maybe even many of us, saw those things as an invasion of Our World, Our Imagination.  We were tuning in to SL to at least in part, tune out of RL.

So while there is no specific statement to this effect, my worry is that LL would try to bring this advertising In World, the one place that I absolutely would not want  to see stained by this stuff.  Kind of goes back to the old question, is anything safe (sacrosanct) any more?

[Randall Ahren]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

Kind of goes back to the old question, is anything safe (sacrosanct) any more?

---

Yes, for example:

Whales

The Children (most of the time)

Global Warming

Elvis Presley

 

 

 

 

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

Commenting in general now, not to any one specific.  I posted this in the Merchants thread also.

 

Ads don't bother me per se, I've come to accept them (have I been brain washed?) as a part of the Internet.  It's what pays for the content I get to enjoy so freely, and over all I accept the trade off.

One of the things some of us or possibly even many of us loved about SL when I started was that it was basically free of corporate taint.  For the most part, at least as it appeared to me, very few were buying virtual Nike running shoes or Toyota's to drive around the Grid in.  Some of us, and maybe even many of us, saw those things as an invasion of Our World, Our Imagination.  We were tuning in to SL to at least in part, tune out of RL.

So while there is no specific statement to this effect, my worry is that LL would try to bring this advertising In World, the one place that I absolutely would not want  to see stained by this stuff.  Kind of goes back to the old question, is anything safe (sacrosanct) any more?

---

The thing is, you were interested in a camera lens, so ads about lenses suited you. You may no longer be interested in them but they were tailored to you personally - and that's good. The other thing is that you weren't getting extra ads for lenses - you were getting the same number of ads. If you didn't get ads for lenses, you'd have got ads for other things. So I don't see any problem with the ads you were getting.

I will be right alongside you if LL brings the ads inworld. I don't see how they can do it though, because, although the search does use a browser, the display size isn't big enough to accomodate the target pages after clicking on ads. I can't think of any other place they could put them.

[Phil Deakins]

I took the time to watch the video and I have a few comments to make.

1. The first example he gave was Facebook. What Facebook did was stupid - IF they actually did what he said, which I find hard to believe. Judging by other things he said, I prefer to think that Facebook didn't do what he said they did.

2. He exaggerated Google's capabilities. It's true that Google has been personalising the search results for quite some time, or at least they were working on it the last time I heard, and, according to this chap, they are doing it. Good for them! It's bound to have improved the search results. He actually showed an example of the improved search results but he passed it off as a bad thing. Pure propagana.

His exaggeration is that there is no way in the world that Google can know what he wants the audience to believe Google knows. I.e. your location. For that, his diagramme shows "sitting", the intention being to show that Google can know where in your house you are, which, of course, is bollocks. Pure propaganda.

3. He mentioned that news is also personalised. Excellent! I don't use news sites but, if i did, I'd very much appreciate them being tailored to the sort of news that interests me.

I have to say that I stopped watching the video at that point (half way through) because it was already blatantly obvious that the guy is simply scaremongering. He's probably the sort of person who wants absolutely nothing about him to be known by anyone at all unless he gives explicit permission, and he wants people to believe that there are 'reds under the beds!'. We see posts to that effect in forums.

I'm sorry, Perrie, but that guy lost his credibility as far as I'm concerned, very early on - with the misinformation (propaganda) about Google.

Personalising things on the web is a huge plus, and not a negative thing at all.

[Dillon Levenque]

 

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I think Phil has written that he did once do a lot of work with internet data mining/advertising/that sort of thing, so I'll just read both of your perspectives and learn.

---

I've never done any data-mining. I was an SEO until SL captured me, but my experiences for this thread's topic is that I've dealt with affiliate ads on my sites for many years. I've even had sites containing nothing but affiliate ads. In the past I made a lot of money from them but, as with everything I do, my interest wore thin over time, and now I just get a smallish monthly amount from them because I stopped keeping up with them. You have to maintain top search rankings to do well, and I lost interest in keeping up with the ever-changing search engines.

 

---

 

Phil, I phrased that poorly. I did not mean to imply you actually did data mining but that you had been involved in Internet advertising etc. and seemed to have a good idea of how all that sort of thing is done. Data mining to me includes targeting me based on things I've looked at/bought/searched for (as in Perrie's example with the camera lens). They all do it. There may be no malicious intent as the term 'data mining' is usually understood, but the principle is the same. It's a trick as old as advertising; it's just the the net gives them (what they think are) superior tools.

[161488303349]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

You are reading far too much into it, 16. For instance, no 3rd party can know what you buy on the marketplace. They may or may not be able to know that you looked at virtual ponies, but that's all..

---

well (:

here is the url transaction history for buying some boots  on the MP. I break each url onto different lines so can read more easy

https: // marketplace.secondlife . com

/products/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93 &search%5Bcategory_id%5D=&search%5Bmaturity_level%5D=G&search%5Bkeywords%5D=boots

https: // marketplace.secondlife. com

/p/YQ-Ladys-Boots-Space-Resize-Script-DEMO/1388491

https:// marketplace . secondlife. com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/linden_dollar/new

https: // marketplace . secondlife.com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/linden_dollar/continue

https : //marketplace.secondlife.com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/receipt

+

+

the point i am making by show these kinds of urls is about me/us not having any option but to allow linden to pass this kinda transaction history data to a 3rd party

it goes to the heart of SL this point does. as we have always understood it. the rule/convention that no one can give out our private info to anyone else unless by our permission. linden have applied this rule to themselfs also. until now. this a gamechanger for all of us

while i can adblock to not see adverts. is no way at this time to opt out of this transaction data (with my info in it) being delivered to the 3rd party advertiser

yes this is how the general interwebz advert model works. my choices are like i said before:

a) dont care

b) dont use it (the secondlife website)

+

whats the effect of this? on linden? on MP shopkeepers? the effect that will be caused by any new pattern of response behaviours as shoppers we might make in response to this change. at least for certain kinds of products for some people

linden say they going to consider all this carefully as they go. am just raising what i think is the key point. and hope they are taking this into consideration while they thinking about it

bc is a big call this that linden are making. how it will work out eventually i dunno

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

.....The overall effect of 3rd parties gathering the small amount of data that's available to them, is that you personally will sometimes receive advertisements that are tailored to your interests.....,

 

---

 

I'd like to correct this one statement.  They are not tailoring the Ads to my interests, they are tailoring the ads to what THEY think I am interested in and what THEY think they can capitalize on.

Three weeks ago I checked a review on a camera lens and even priced it (too expensive IMO).  Since then the ads for camera lenses have been non stop when I browse the web.  And I really have no interest in this lens and it has reached the point that I am finding it very annoying.  But they sure keep pushing it on me.

As to the above video, it was a big eye opener to me.  Because people think when they search for information on the Web, that the search results they get are unbiased.  It is sadly so far from the truth it actually scares me as more and more people continue to turn to the Internet as their primary source for information.

Any one that hasn't watched it, at least IMO, it is worth the ten minutes of your time.

---

I heard a guest on a radio show talk about this topic a month or so ago and, after listening to that guest, switched from using Google as my search engine to a different one that states it does not store my IP address nor stores personal info.  This video underscored the info in the radio program.  Thank you for posting it.

As an interesting aside, while still using Google I constantly had ads with photos of men that said: "Hundreds of men <my age group> who live in <my city> are just waiting to meet you."  While I doubt that, it always struck me as humorous.  Since I switched to another search engine I have not seen these ads whereas before they were a daily occurrance.

Edit: clarification

[Deltango Vale]

The banner ads on SL Marketplace are sleazy. Yes, it looks like a cheap freebie site. Yes, it looks like a porn site. It gives the appearance that Linden Lab is scraping the bottom of the barrel to get revenue. It certainly pollutes the SL brand. I don't mind advertising, but ads for ambulance chasers? How low can you go?

[Phil Deakins]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

The banner ads on SL Marketplace are sleazy. Yes, it looks like a cheap freebie site. Yes, it looks like a porn site. It gives the appearance that Linden Lab is scraping the bottom of the barrel to get revenue. It certainly pollutes the SL brand. I don't mind advertising, but ads for ambulance chasers? How low can you go?

---

You are absolutely wrong. The ads don't make the SL site look like a cheap freebie site, and they don't make it look like a porn site. You are not very experienced on the web if if you have those opinions. Or maybe your main web experience is with cheap freebie sites and porn sites. They make the SL site look like a perfectly normal site. Moreover, the ads don't pollute the SL brand - not in any way.

The only part of your post that may be right is when you said, "It gives the appearance that Linden Lab is scraping the bottom of the barrel to get revenue." You may be right about that. Of course, you may be wrong too. I see it as nothing more than LL being sensible enough to take advantage of some free money. But I may be wrong about that.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

Phil, I phrased that poorly. I did not mean to imply you actually did data mining but that you had been involved in Internet advertising etc. and seemed to have a good idea of how all that sort of thing is done. Data mining to me includes targeting me based on things I've looked at/bought/searched for (as in Perrie's example with the camera lens). They all do it. There may be no malicious intent as the term 'data mining' is usually understood, but the principle is the same. It's a trick as old as advertising; it's just the the net gives them (what they think are) superior tools.

---

Yes, they all do it, or at least many systems do it. I don't see the phrase 'data mining' as a bad thing. I can be bad but it can be good. In the case of search results and advertisements, it's a very good and positive thing, and the only people who object to it are those who have the weird idea that they don't want anyone knowing anything about them without their permission. That ultra-private attitude is really weird, imo, and has always been totally unrealistic.

They are the sort of people people who would object to having their DNA and fingerprints on file, but if the whole population's DNA and fingerprints were on file, crime would plummet. They want crime to plummet as long as they can remain totally private themselves - unless they are they criminals, of course, or unless they are the victime of crime. But I digress.

Privacy for privacy's sake is silly, imo. The use that the data mining we are discussing is put to, is to everyone's benefit. But discussing data mining is a digression too

[Phil Deakins]

---

16 wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

You are reading far too much into it, 16. For instance, no 3rd party can know what you buy on the marketplace. They may or may not be able to know that you looked at virtual ponies, but that's all..

---

well (:

here is the url transaction history for buying some boots  on the MP. I break each url onto different lines so can read more easy

https: // marketplace.secondlife . com

/products/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93 &search%5Bcategory_id%5D=&search%5Bmaturity_level%5D=G&search%5Bkeywords%5D=boots

https: // marketplace.secondlife. com

/p/YQ-Ladys-Boots-Space-Resize-Script-DEMO/1388491

https:// marketplace . secondlife. com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/linden_dollar/new

https: // marketplace . secondlife.com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/linden_dollar/continue

https : //marketplace.secondlife.com

/orders/1317844295/checkout/receipt

+

+

the point i am making by show these kinds of urls is about me/us not having any option but to allow linden to pass this kinda transaction history data to a 3rd party

it goes to the heart of SL this point does. as we have always understood it. the rule/convention that no one can give out our private info to anyone else unless by our permission. linden have applied this rule to themselfs also. until now. this a gamechanger for all of us

while i can adblock to not see adverts. is no way at this time to opt out of this transaction data (with my info in it) being delivered to the 3rd party advertiser

yes this is how the general interwebz advert model works. my choices are like i said before:

a) dont care

b) dont use it (the secondlife website)

+

whats the effect of this? on linden? on MP shopkeepers? the effect that will be caused by any new pattern of response behaviours as shoppers we might make in response to this change. at least for certain kinds of products for some people

linden say they going to consider all this carefully as they go. am just raising what i think is the key point. and hope they are taking this into consideration while they thinking about it

bc is a big call this that linden are making. how it will work out eventually i dunno

 

---

You don't have any option when you use the web for anything. It's exactly the same when you visit most sites on the web. This no different.

If those full URLs are the ones that the 3rd party gets when your browser requests an ad, then a little bit of information about your IP address can be stored and made use of to tailor thing for you. That's a good thing. It's not a bad thing. Take Perrie's lens example, for instance. He was interested in lenses and for while afterwards, the ads he got concerned lenses. He would have still got ads about stuff, but it was good for him that he got them about something he'd shown an interest in - even though he'd actually lost interest by then. The personalisation of experience on the web is a positive thing - not a bad thing. As long as the personalisation is with search results and ads in websites, then it's a huge plus.

[161488303349]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

16 wrote:

the point i am making by show these kinds of urls is about me/us not having any option but to allow linden to pass this kinda transaction history data to a 3rd party

  

---

You don't have any option when you use the web for anything. It's exactly the same when you visit most sites on the web. This no different.

 

---

the difference is that there has been a change by linden.  a change to the relationship we have with them. this the important consideration

whether or not other online websites do this don't have any bearing on our linden/resident relationship. the bearing is that this is a policy change. not a technical change. beneficial or not

+

what I am not understanding from you is:

if you/me/us login on our accounts to secondlife website then 3rd party advertising and subsequent datamining is ok bc there are benefits in this for us. benefits that outweigh the negatives

then when Perrie (I think was him. I will check after type this) said he would not want see this in the viewer. you agree with him on that

am a bit confused when you say this. bc if is good for us when login with the browser. then why would it not good for us for the same reasons when login in with the viewer?

maybe you have some other reason about why you agree with not having it in the viewer. which you not explain yet. or i am misunderstanding

+

edit: yes was Perrie. when you said: "I will be right alongside you if LL brings the ads inworld"

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

16 wrote:

the difference is that there has been a change by linden.  a change to the relationship we have with them. this the important consideration

whether or not other online websites do this don't have any bearing on our linden/resident relationship. the bearing is that this is a policy change. not a technical change. beneficial or not 

---

I don't see that. I don't see a policy change concerning users from LL.

 

---

what I am not understanding from you is:

if you/me/us login on our accounts to secondlife website then 3rd party advertising and subsequent datamining is ok bc there are benefits in this for us. benefits that outweigh the negatives

then when Perrie (I think was him. I will check after type this) said he would not want see this in the viewer. you agree with him on that

am a bit confused when you say this. bc if is good for us when login with the browser. then why would it not good for us for the same reasons when login in with the viewer?

maybe you have some other reason about why you agree with not having it in the viewer. which you not explain yet. or i am misunderstanding 

---

I see no negatives. Only positives.

The reason I agreed with Perrie on that point is because I do not want any ads using any part of the viewer screen. When I'm in a website, I am happy with affiliate ads on-screen, but when I'm in a virtual world (a 'game' if you like) I don't want to be plagued by affiliate ads. There is a place for everything and inworld is not a place for affiliate ads that only lead me outside. Imagine dancing in an SL club and suddenly a 'We Buy Gold' ad pops up on your screen in a small browser box. No thank you.

I think I'm right in saying that the only browser that's used within the viewer is search - maybe profiles too. Those browsers could accomodate affiliate ads but they couldn't accomodate any pages that returned after clicking on one. Clicking on one could open up a browser or new tab in the person's proper browser, I suppose, but I'd be against any infringement by affiliate ads within the virtual world. I'd put money on that LL won't do it, anyway. If they did, I'd have to believe that SL is seriously struggling, and on its last legs.

It's good when it happens in the normal browser - website - because it can help each of us to have a more personalised web experience. It would be bad if it occured within SL because it would interfere with what we are actually doing in SL, and it could only lead us to the outside.

[161488303349]

i think i now see why i not been able understand you. we use SL viewer in different ways. so you not see what i see

I made a pic below so you can see what I see

i not login to the website with any browser for this to happen. just click Me \ Account dashboard

the adverts already inworld. is why I not get why you was making a distinction been browser and viewer

+

the thoughts i been raising are to do with how far are linden going to take this? like are we only ever going to see linden and resident adverts in this way. or are they going to extend this to 3rd parties? and if they are going to extend to 3rd parties then how far will it extend. inworld search pages? profiles? etc

and can we opt out. or is a browser a browser same as any other and that's just the way it is bc thats how the web works

+

here is the pic

[Dillon Levenque]

 

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

Phil, I phrased that poorly. I did not mean to imply you actually did data mining but that you had been involved in Internet advertising etc. and seemed to have a good idea of how all that sort of thing is done. Data mining to me includes targeting me based on things I've looked at/bought/searched for (as in Perrie's example with the camera lens). They all do it. There may be no malicious intent as the term 'data mining' is usually understood, but the principle is the same. It's a trick as old as advertising; it's just the the net gives them (what they think are) superior tools.

---

Yes, they all do it, or at least many systems do it. I don't see the phrase 'data mining' as a bad thing. I can be bad but it can be good.

In the case of search results and advertisements, it's a very good and positive thing

, and the only people who object to it are those who have the weird idea that they don't want anyone knowing anything about them without their permission.

---

 

With the part I bolded: if it is a good and positive thing, that's only true for the merchant. It's a huge negative for me. I don't object so much on the basis of privacy. I take a few steps to protect my privacy just because that's how I am and always have been. I suppose it has to do with how I was raised.

I object vigorously to the merchant's idea of, "If you bought that you'll really like this!", something that internet advertising has made the norm. I hate that. Imagine this:

You are visiting a city with time on your hands, and notice a large and inviting bookstore, advertising new & used books. You walk in, looking forward to browsing their shelves. Instead you are greeted at the door.

"Hi! How can I help you?"

"Just wanted to look for a book, thanks."

"Oh good! What do you like to read? Do you like mysteries? Romance? History?"

"Well, both mysteries and History, actually, but.."

"Well then look at this interesting mystery right here! (shows book) And this one!".  (shows another)

At this point I think most of us would bolt for the exit. With me, it's not just bookstores (remember when there were bookstores?). It's how I like to shop. If I have a question I know who to ask, but most of the time I just want to wander and look on my own. I don't want suggestions!

[Phil Deakins]

Ah. You choose to view the SL website inworld. I didn't know you could do that. It's your choice, of course but if those ads reach the inworld browser that's used for search then I'd object a lot. I think it's also a browser that's used for profiles but I'm not sure. If it is, I'd object to ads getting in the way there too.

An ad blocker is an add-on for a browser. You can't add an add-on to that inworld browser you use so you can't block the ads when you view the website that way.

[Phil Deakins]

It's a good and positive thing for users too, Dillon. It helps to personalise your web experieence.

You bookstore analogy doesn't work because the person at the door is interupting what you're doing. On the web you don't get interupted at all. You're going to get ads anyway and, if they are personalised, you'll get ads about things that may interest you. You won't get any fewer ads by protecting your privacy. Not unless you use an ad blocker, of course, but then the question wouldn't arise in the first place.