News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by SilasX on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:39AM (#18922306)
"We showed him an ad. He bought the vacuum cleaner."

'In that order?'

"Shhhh, just give us money."

Half-joking there -- in a previous discussion, the claim was that the ad-buyers don't care enough to check for whether these product-buyers were ones that had already seen an ad, or it was after the fact.

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by semi-extrinsic on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @01:03PM (#18923191)
This makes sense. While the "you might need a second vacuum cleaner" argument maaybe checks out, the "you might need a second sous vide machine/espresso bean grinder/welding machine" definitely doesn't make sense.
Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by dsr_ on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @04:14PM (#18925327)
There are some people who end up buying all the best coffee bean grinders in search of perfection; there are people who can't resist a classic MIG welder. But those people were going to buy them anyway, and represent too few sales to justify any expenditure.

What you need are complementary goods. These people bought coffee bean grinders? Show them ads for travel mugs, for high-end coffee subscriptions, and fancy grinder-cleaning brushes.

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by semi-extrinsic on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @06:26PM (#18926641)
Agreed; just to be clear, when I've had this happen to me it's showing an ad e.g. for the exact same model coffee grinder from the exact same store that I already bought one from. Clearly no intelligence involved there.