"cut of 60% per advertising dollar." So between 2 and 3. That is incredibly little for all the surveillance it brings with it. And I don't think fb would understate here.
If "hyper targeting" is that useless, why are even still discussing allowing it?
> https://twitter.com/DaveStangis/status/1339183289349918721
"cut of 60% per advertising dollar." So between 2 and 3. That is incredibly little for all the surveillance it brings with it. And I don't think fb would understate here.
If "hyper targeting" is that useless, why are even still discussing allowing it?