Advertising is a core funding model for a lot of businesses. There is the legitimate the argument that upending it now could lead to the collapse of a lot of the tech sector. While I do believe we never should have gotten here in the first place, we should be cautious and methodical when unwinding it. We don’t want a recession, and we need US businesses to be able to compete on the global stage.
Perhaps I just did a bad job of explaining my position; I agree. I just think it’s worth considering the unintended consequences of a rug pull. Maybe we need to wean the industry off slowly or something else entirely. etc. all I was getting at was that caution doesn’t immediately mean someone is bought and paid for by industry lobbies. There is nuance here.
Thinking about any unintended consequences is always good. I also agree that a ‘rug pull’ in general terms is not a good thing, however; since we are talking about the privacy of the consumer and turning said privacy into a consumer right, I don’t think there will be a lot of negative consequences. The companies are going to complain but they do that no matter what.
Personally I think, any company that solely relies on selling user data as revenue stream deserves to go down.
Hot take, considering how ridiculous prices have gotten for things like housing and groceries, maybe a recession would be good and help reduce those prices. I’m not an economist so very much spitballing
Advertising is a core funding model for a lot of businesses. There is the legitimate the argument that upending it now could lead to the collapse of a lot of the tech sector. While I do believe we never should have gotten here in the first place, we should be cautious and methodical when unwinding it. We don’t want a recession, and we need US businesses to be able to compete on the global stage.
Bro we can advertise without breaching of privacy.
Perhaps I just did a bad job of explaining my position; I agree. I just think it’s worth considering the unintended consequences of a rug pull. Maybe we need to wean the industry off slowly or something else entirely. etc. all I was getting at was that caution doesn’t immediately mean someone is bought and paid for by industry lobbies. There is nuance here.
Imagine this exact comment, but for advertising cigarettes to children.
If a business depends on doing harm to people to create ever-increasing shareholder value, that business deserves to burn.
but what if line goes down?
Think of the GDP. /s
Thinking about any unintended consequences is always good. I also agree that a ‘rug pull’ in general terms is not a good thing, however; since we are talking about the privacy of the consumer and turning said privacy into a consumer right, I don’t think there will be a lot of negative consequences. The companies are going to complain but they do that no matter what.
Personally I think, any company that solely relies on selling user data as revenue stream deserves to go down.
If they need to buy/sell all our personal information so they can advertise, and they need to do that to survive, I’d say let them go bankrupt.
Also, what is proposed is very reasonable, this won’t cause a recession.
As long as it doesn’t take other industries with it, hard agree.
If you’re right, no disagreement there either.
All I was trying to get at was that there is some nuance here; concern is not exclusive to corporate shilling.
Most of us in ad tech have been living with a patchwork of these laws for 5 years. This will simply life.
https://iapp.org/media/pdf/resource_center/State_Comp_Privacy_Law_Chart.pdf
Hot take, considering how ridiculous prices have gotten for things like housing and groceries, maybe a recession would be good and help reduce those prices. I’m not an economist so very much spitballing