Alternatively, the Faustian bargin we made with the FAANGs was that we would provide our data and they would give us useful ads.

If I bought a nice leather belt, perhaps I should get ads for nicer leather shoes or some other item, maybe a leather polish/waterproofing kit to keep my belt nice and new. The failure of the Advertising-Industrial complex in that regard has been disappointing to say the least.

To do that you have to give up more information about what you actually bought which IMO is an even bigger privacy issue than what we're currently giving away.

I think it's reasonable for the ad industry to assume that you bought the belt once you abruptly stopped showing interest in comparing belts for a couple of days. No access to purchase history needed.

I'm not sure if they get that kind of historical data of your interests when they're bidding on ads though either.

the incognito mode in chrome and inprivate in edge have become my "normal" browsing mode. i keep a regular window for a handful of web sites & apps like gmail, youtube, github, etc.

i instinctively open everything else in incognito now. i have noticed less tracking, less ads, and a more pleasant browsing experience.

The cookie banners are nagging though

Yes, I know the cause, but I'm pointing out a flaw in their plan.

It would be smarter to look for pools of products and be less targetted. E.g. to know that people who buy long lived leather belts may also be interested in long-lived leather wallets, or long-lived shirts, or glass containers instead of plastic, etc, and then rotate all these products in, rather than this targetted barrage of non-stop belt ads for the next year. This just can't be the optimal advertising strategy, there must be diminishing returns to this level of specificity.

For what its worth, companies probably DO look into this, but people who are bidding on the "leather belt" keyword are outpaying those companies in adjacent products.

At the end of the day, advertising space is auction based and if the belt companies want to bid the highest for that space, they win.

That would be a really interesting example of market failure, as it suggests if the leather-belt companies pay less, they would get more business.