Honestly I don't understand why 1 is so bad? Does anyone have hard data that all of this tracking and user profiling is actually resulting in increased ad revenue? I for one have never liked personalized ads as it is almost always is something I don't want, already have, or just bought.

It seems if you show me ads optimized to the content I am viewing it would turn out better. After all I will probably only want to purchase one chainsaw in my life, but if I am looking at how to cut down a tree it would make sense to show me chainsaw ads for that tiny sliver of time, then never again.

Why did it get this way?

> it is almost always is something I don't want, already have, or just bought.

The explanation I have heard for the "just bought" scenario (I heard it on the internet, so grain of salt and so on) is that they're looking to catch people who purchased the item but have returned it, and are now in the market for a different version of the same item (e.g., you returned the chainsaw because it was too small, and now want a bigger one). Which makes sense, but whether there are enough people in that scenario to be worth the cost...

That seems unlikely, when you consider the advertising market and how it works. Fundamentally, the providers (i.e. the chainsaw store) don't tell the advertising platforms when a person buys a chainsaw (and often they can't tell themselves).

So, what ends up happening is the situation that many people complain about is that the provider shared a list of people who looked at chainsaws, and then the advertising platform shows them ads until they run out of money/find more profitable ads to sell.

From the perspective of the ad platform, it doesn't matter that you already bought it. From the perspective of the provider, this is acceptable waste.

It might be that personalised ads are only marginally better (if at all), but the perception of the advertisers and publishers is that it’s very important, thus creating a (fakeish) moat for Google, as it’s more difficult to execute. Or maybe that’s really not that important, as the biggest moat remains Google being number one web destination.

For us advertising a product with targeted ads definitely performs better than non-targeted ads. Also remember that most stuff being advertised is consumable so you will most likely at some point buy it again.

Do not track is marketing jargon. Apps can still continue to track users individually. What was lost was cross app tracking which was used for most mobile app ads.

2 is already happening. Facebook is pushing hard to get full data from partners to optimize ad tracking. Just look at the maximum data option for the Shopify integration now:

"The Maximum setting shares your customer's personal information to match users on Facebook's network. The information collected using this setting includes your customer's name, location, email address, and phone number, as well as their browsing behavior in your online store."

https://help.shopify.com/en/manual/promoting-marketing/analy...

4. Force social logins for apps and use that as tracking identifier.

No longer anonymous ads

( Or people could just pay for the app as alternative. But that won't happen)

4. Braindead Apple users press the allow tracking button.

It's not too many: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2021-05-10-13-percent...

It would be interesting to see what would happen if Apple presented a similar big blue button allowing you to install third-party IPAs from the internet. User choice is what matters, right?