<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for dmarti</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/dmarti/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/dmarti/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:30:44 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Apple Treats The Disease. Google Treats The Symptoms.</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2017/06/apple-treats-disease-google-treats.html#comment-3382616711</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Crappy ads promote blocking, and web publishers know that. But they don't have the market power to reject annoying ads, because tracking enables crappy advertisers to reach the same audience on another site.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;When users protect themselves from tracking, that translates into more market power for publishers, so more power to enforce standards on annoying ads.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://blog.aloodo.org/posts/service-journalism/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.aloodo.org/posts/service-journalism/"&gt;http://blog.aloodo.org/post...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2017 15:30:44 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: GOOG, FB, P&amp;G Create Coalition To Do Nothing</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2016/09/goog-fb-p-create-coalition-to-do-nothing.html#comment-2905008023</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Web ads did not end up being so annoying because&lt;br&gt;Data-Driven Marketing masters have failed to do&lt;br&gt;some magickal research that would quantify user&lt;br&gt;irritation. Any web editor who has ever moderated&lt;br&gt;a comment section knows what the problem ads are.&lt;br&gt;Web sites would start refusing those problem ads&lt;br&gt;tomorrow if they had the market power to do it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://blog.aloodo.org/posts/why-coalition-for-better-ads-is-a-waste-of-time/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blog.aloodo.org/posts/why-coalition-for-better-ads-is-a-waste-of-time/"&gt;http://blog.aloodo.org/post...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2016 12:39:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Facebook "Amazed" By Crap They've Been Selling</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2016/03/facebook-amazed-by-crap-theyve-been.html#comment-2574533089</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Facebook stopped doing this particular project, but, as Dave Jakubowski said, "those ads were almost certainly dumped into another low-quality exchange where all of them were most likely purchased."&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:53:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Waste Not, Grow Not</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2016/02/waste-not-grow-not.html#comment-2517416269</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't think it's a coincidence that ad blocking went mainstream just as people started noticing ads "following them around the Internet." &lt;a href="https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2015/07/06/ad-blocking-why-now/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2015/07/06/ad-blocking-why-now/"&gt;https://digitalcontentnext....&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:31:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Waste Not, Grow Not</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2016/02/waste-not-grow-not.html#comment-2516608861</link><description>&lt;p&gt;David Ogilvy once wrote, "The consumer is not a moron, she is your wife." The average shopper is just as good an applied behavioral economist as the average database marketer.  People know when they're being targeted individually, so a digital cold call doesn't work the same way that a public, costly, hard-to-repudiate ad can.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2015/08/19/wheres-the-signal/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="https://digitalcontentnext.org/blog/2015/08/19/wheres-the-signal/"&gt;https://digitalcontentnext....&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:02:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: over the counter-culture</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/04/over-counter-culture.html#comment-1991612344</link><description>&lt;p&gt;d00d, the _left_ hasn't had a decent counter-cultural idea since 1993. The _right_ has invented precarity, surveillance marketing, and Bitcoin.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2015 08:57:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Display Advertising Is Poison</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/11/display-advertising-is-poison.html#comment-1710788507</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I seriously thought about signing up, but I ended up deciding against it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/why-no-contributor/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/why-no-contributor/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 18:07:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: 10 Dreadful Clichés The Ad Industry Should Euthanize</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/06/10-dreadful-cliches-ad-industry-should.html#comment-1427055663</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"Relevant" -- that's adtech-speak for "creepy".&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2014 12:39:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Ad Industry Is The Web's Lapdog</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/ad-industry-is-webs-lapdog.html#comment-1393438210</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Or 0.03% of traffic was from bots written by people too lazy to try them on the same analytics tools you use. (Seriously though, it's a game, like spam vs. spam filters...some days more bogus stuff gets through, other days either the filters have it under control or the scammers are busy running DDoS or Bitcoin mining)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 12:08:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Ad Industry Is The Web's Lapdog</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/ad-industry-is-webs-lapdog.html#comment-1393426261</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great piece but the most important problem is in the big picture.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Surveillance marketing creeps people out (not just privacy freaks: 86% of users have taken privacy measures online.   &lt;a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/09/05/anonymity-privacy-and-security-online/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/09/05/anonymity-privacy-and-security-online/"&gt;http://www.pewinternet.org/...&lt;/a&gt; )&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Because "nobody knows where their online ads run", the people who are temporarily in charge of great brands are undermining them by associating them with bottom-feeder sites and creepy tracking practices.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2014 12:01:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What does "It" look like? - The COMRADITY Journal</title><link>http://www.comradity.com/comradity/2014/04/what-does-it-look-like.html#comment-1359006986</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It won't though. Marketing executives are fad-driven, and the flavor of the month is surveillance marketing, not "old-fashioned" budgets.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2014 10:34:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What does "It" look like? - The COMRADITY Journal</title><link>http://www.comradity.com/comradity/2014/04/what-does-it-look-like.html#comment-1358476046</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The industry has gotten into this mess because people are sold on the idea of chasing users from high-value content (which writers get paid to make) onto lower-value content, which is often infringing, scammy, or otherwise problematic. Michael Tiffany explained it best: "The fundamental value proposition of these&lt;br&gt;ad tech companies who are de-anonymizing the Internet&lt;br&gt;is, "Why spend big CPMs on branded sites when I can get&lt;br&gt;them on no-name sites?""&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fighting fraud is going to require advertisers to make some hard choices: &lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/adtech-fraud/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/adtech-fraud/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2014 22:35:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Facebook's Awesome Bait-And-Switch</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/03/facebooks-awesome-bait-and-switch.html#comment-1312441141</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm getting "13 Celebrities with Awesome and REAL Bodies". The ad system must know something about you.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:15:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Facebook's Awesome Bait-And-Switch</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/03/facebooks-awesome-bait-and-switch.html#comment-1312438538</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Now that I have the Facebook profile of an 88-year-old woman, I'm getting terrible, cheesy, scammy advertising on that site. There's nothing social or sharing about it, just low-end web ads.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/facebook-ads/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/facebook-ads/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It looks like Bob is right about legit advertisers not wanting to reach older customers, anyway.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:13:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Don&amp;#8217;t eat that cookie</title><link>http://www.economistgroup.com/leanback/big-data-2/dont-eat-that-cookie/#comment-1310431588</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The problem is that out of adtech, fraud control, and privacy, you can only pick two.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/adtech-fraud/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/adtech-fraud/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2014 02:45:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: Why I Have A Blog, A Facebook Page, And A Twitter Account</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2014/02/why-i-have-blog-facebook-page-and.html#comment-1259392435</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You can always run &lt;a href="http://dlvr.it" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="dlvr.it"&gt;dlvr.it&lt;/a&gt; to gateway your blog posts, or any other RSS feed, to Facebook. (Not affiliated with either company, just a satisfied user of &lt;a href="http://dlvr.it" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="dlvr.it"&gt;dlvr.it&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:58:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: A Very Intricate Nonsense</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-very-intricate-nonsense.html#comment-1090694303</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good points.  Because large agencies and tech companies are finding it so easy to bullshit the clients with math, the industry is systematically throwing away what's valuable about advertising in the first place.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/targeted-advertising-considered-harmful/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/targeted-advertising-considered-harmful/"&gt;http://zgp.org/targeted-adv...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:21:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Ad Contrarian: The 5 Dumbest Ideas About Online Advertising</title><link>http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-5-dumbest-ideas-about-online.html#comment-972069195</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If you ever expand this to a top 10, you might want to save a spot for targeting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/where-is-all-the-spam/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/where-is-all-the-spam/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The industry still believes that you can make advertising more "efficient" by paying for creepy targeting instead of quality content to run the ads on -- but if that worked, email spam would have worked in the 1990s.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:32:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Mozilla Comes under Attack - and of Age</title><link>http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2013/07/mozilla-comes-under-attack---and-of-age/index.htm#comment-969646011</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The IAB's position on creepy web ads today is strangely familiar.  It's the same thing the spammers were saying about email spam in the late 1990s.  Remember?  It's just those elitist nerds who want to filter spam--regular users like it!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/where-is-all-the-spam/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/where-is-all-the-spam/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/busi...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2013 18:18:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Old School? It&amp;#8217;s Time to Change Your Mind About Social CRM.</title><link>https://nextprinciples.com/old-school-its-time-to-change-your-mind-about-social-crm/#comment-555286564</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Au contraire, Lou -- better to not have an official Facebook page at all than to have one that's either abandoned, or only a one-way channel.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social sites aren't advertising made targeted -- they're customer service ticketing systems made public.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:09:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: TCP Sucks</title><link>http://bramcohen.com/2012/05/07/tcp-sucks#comment-521533523</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Instead of having the router drop all the packets in its queue, what about using the milk algorithm? (When you remove milk from your refrigerator, you check the date. If the date is within an acceptable range, you drink it, otherwise discard it.) When a router adds a packet to the queue, timestamp it. Check the timestamp on the way out.  If it's stale, discard it and check the next one.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 08:28:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Microsoft Gives Up on Competition, Tries to Buy IE Users Instead</title><link>http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/11/microsoft-gives-up-on-competit.php#comment-358403372</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Dean Hachamovitch      from the MSIE team did an interesting post on "tracking protection" (IOW, AdBlock out of the box).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/12/07/ie9-and-privacy-introducing-tracking-protection-v8.aspx" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/12/07/ie9-and-privacy-introducing-tracking-protection-v8.aspx"&gt;http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;How's that working out for them?  Privacy could be a pretty good selling point for MSFT, since they aren't tied to ad revenue the way Firefox and Chrome are.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 10:18:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Tech Shopping Rules of Thumb</title><link>https://kk.org/thetechnium/tech-shopping-r/#comment-203320807</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You can get double usage out of a quality laptop by upgrading RAM, replacing storage, and battery, and doing an OS reinstall after one "lifespan."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If it hooks up between the computer and your ears, try a music store for one that will last a lifetime before you get a crappy one from the computer store (headphones, amps, "monitor" speakers, USB audio boxes, mics)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 18:57:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Oracle Ceases Development For Intel&amp;#8217;s Itanium Chip</title><link>http://newenterprise.allthingsd.com/20110323/oracle-ceases-development-for-intels-itanium-chip/#comment-170517903</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Doesn't Novell's SUSE  Linux Enterprise Server still support it?  They have a lot of HPC customers who are on IA64.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 19:08:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: That was quick: Four lines of code is all it takes for The New York Times&amp;#8217; paywall to come tumbling down</title><link>http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/03/that-was-quick-four-lines-of-code-is-all-it-takes-for-the-new-york-times-paywall-to-come-tumbling-down-2/#comment-169383906</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This trick looks about as easy as ad blocking, which has been around for a long time, and is pretty easy, but very few users bother to do it: &lt;a href="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/www/ad-blocking/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://zgp.org/~dmarti/www/ad-blocking/"&gt;http://zgp.org/~dmarti/www/...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If the paywall is this leaky, then most Javascript nerds will just bypass it without making an infringing copy of the story.  If the NYT made it tighter, more of the nerds would copy stories to sites outside the paywall, where more non-nerds would see them.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmarti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:18:40 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>