- Aug 2020
Aizenman, Joshua, Yothin Jinjarak, Donghyun Park, and Huanhuan Zheng. ‘Good-Bye Original Sin, Hello Risk On-Off, Financial Fragility, and Crises?’ National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, 23 April 2020. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27030.
- sovereign bond issuance data
- emerging markets
- South Africa
- financial fragility
- monetary policy
- global financial crisis
- May 2020
This kind of cookie-based data collection happens elsewhere on the internet. Giant companies use it as a way to assess where their users go as they surf the web, which can then be tied into providing better targeted advertising.
Previously, Google has said that the data captured from reCaptcha is not used for ad targeting or analyzing user interests and preferences. After this story was published, Google said that the information collected through reCaptcha will not be used for personalized advertising by Google.
- Mar 2020
Now, if you intend to serve personalized ads to users, you’ll need to ensure that explicit consent to ad personalisation is collected before you can display personalised ads for end-users (where this consent is not collected, Google will default to serving non-personalized ads, potentially impacting your ad revenue).
Many people see tracking cookies as an invasion of privacy since they allow a site to build up profiles on users without their consent.
The problem is that even if the visitor is not watching the video or interacting with it, in any capacity, YouTube still collects and stores data on them. Not cool.This is done using cookies that are placed on the user’s browser the moment they load a webpage with a YouTube video embedded in it. These cookies are used to track users, serve targeted ads (Google’s bread and butter), and add info to user’s profile. Yes, they have profiles on everyone.
It wouldn’t mean an end to being able to target ads online. Contextual targeting doesn’t require personal data — and has been used successfully by the likes of non-tracking search engine DuckDuckGo for years (and profitably so). It would just mean an end to the really creepy, stalkerish stuff. The stuff consumers hate — which also serves up horribly damaging societal effects, given that the mass profiling of internet users enables push-button discrimination and exploitation of the vulnerable at vast scale.
- Jul 2018
- Jun 2017
This is one of the smartest computer scientists in the world. He is not going to splash $15m on bullshit.”
Cadwalladr starts with a bold statement: "a Hijacked Democracy." But does Micro Targeting actually work? One of the most important questions in the CA-debate. This article does not provide new facts about the impact of CA's "special sauce".
Argument 1 by David, ex-CA:
He is a smart guy.
Ok, but why is the smart guy confinced?
Argument 2 by Tamsin Shaw:
“The capacity for this science to be used to manipulate emotions is very well established." The arguments are not given in this article. See note from aaronslodounik below for source.
I find this a more convincing arguments about the impact here: https://civichall.org/civicist/will-the-real-psychometric-targeters-please-stand-up/
Also Sue Halpern notes a similar overestimation of the impact of CA's "sercret sause" in this article How He Used Facebook to Win:
After the initial alarm that an obscure data firm might have wormed its way into the American psyche deeply enough to deliver the election to Trump, critics began to question what Alexander Nix, the head of Cambridge Analytica, called the firm’s “secret sauce,” the algorithms it used to predict a voter’s psychological profile, what is known as “psychographics.” Confessore and Hakim’s article about the firm, which appeared on the front page of the Times, quoted numerous consultants, working for both parties, who were dismissive of the firm’s claims. The mathematician Cathy O’Neil, in a commentary for Bloomberg, called Cambridge Analytica’s secret sauce “just more ketchup.” Using psychological traits to craft appeals to voters, she wrote, wasn’t anything new—every candidate was doing it.
Ealiers in 2012 Ethan Roeder (leader of one of the most sopisticated, data-driven campaigns in U.S history) writes in an op-ed in The New York Times:
How do we predict wheter people are going to vote or not? We look at the voter file. It tells us how often a person votes, althought not for whome. Not all strategists agree about how to interpret this information, but the source of the data is no sectret.
He articulates limits in general, and that it is limited specifically to information contained in public records. (More in Hacking the Electorate by Eitan D. Hersh p. 12)
So I wonder if the CA team has so much more to manipulte with in their big database?