It’s probably not even possible for decision makers to discern it from noise.
Each user’s comment has to stand up under its own weight so to speak
So then why did you reply if you already knew your comment and the rest of the comment chain was irrelevant?
Pointing out that many people don't like relevant ads is then a significant thing to acknowledge.
You're acting like pclmulqdq brought up the idea out of nowhere, which is very much not the case.
What people think about ads does matter, and does affect the bottom line.
And it's just annoying for you to act like the dislike is just an "individual opinion" but the "people like relevant ads" claim isn't equally anecdotal.
In case you didn’t see, the user has already claimed to believe the entire comment chain is irrelevant, so your a bit late.
> what is your actual argument
Was it not clear? Okay I can try again.
When advertisers claim that relevant ads are something people want, that's very far from being universally true. Lots of people don't want that. Don't let them use that unsupported claim to support tracking.
Note that the desires of advertisers are not part of this particular argument. It's a simple claim and counterclaim.
Anyone can have an unlimited number of irrelevant opinions that they believe to possess this or that attribute, they may even genuinely believe so, yet it doesn’t amount to anything.
Even if the claimed argument was flawless… it seems strange to put a non sequitor at the beginning.
This is something that people in advertising say a lot, but it's generally not true. I do not want or benefit from you having "better" ad targeting - I will find your product if I want it without the sales pitch.