Ask HN: How would you build a trackerless ad network? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: How would you build a trackerless ad network?

3 pointsjdsin15 comments

We have seen a lot of posts on HN regarding ad networks and ad blockers. Basically there are two arguments: 1) Allow ad networks, so we can compensate content creaters. 2) Block ad networks, because they track users, invade privacy and follow shady practices.

I would love to know your thoughts on how to solve this issue. How to create a trackerless ad network, that solves privacy issues. It should also allow anonymous stats for advertisers, and a good fee structure for content creaters. Lets solve this!

View on HN

I'll take a stab at it. Do not embed javascript at all! Javascript slows down the webpage, send creepy-tracking-stuff back to the ad network, and gets easly blacklisted in adblockers. We should not trust arbitrary 3rd party javascript code anyways. How about embeddable static images instead? Generate a unique img tag for each content creater, that we can refresh at our end, everytime the webpage loads. Will show a new ad everytime a user goes to the page.

But advertisers want to target their advertisements to specific demographics. How can you target the user (identify the user's demographic, to select which ad to show) if you can only collect limited information based on the load of the static image?

Ultimately you would end up with a model where advertisers target based on website, rather than user demographic.

Good question. Maybe target using some kind of heuristics? We can figure out who is loading our imgs: ip addresses, requesting browser details, load time, approximate location (city, state, country), what website is the user visiting (can figure out what they are interested it) etc. We can build anonymous profiles of users. Ofcourse, the bigger the network, more precise the heuristics..

Right. So you've just arrived back at the status quo of tracking!

How do you define "anonymous?" Even if you have a policy not to store "personal details" like real name, you are still tracking some set of attributes of each user (ip address, headers, latency, etc). Together, a set of these attributes is likely sufficient to uniquely identify the user the set belongs to.

So now you're back to the original problem.

Dang it! Back to square one. So it seems its a double edged sword. Personally I feel this is a good compromise. What would you rather have, something like this? Or something like Google Ads that follow you throughout the internet with help of super cookies and javascript, merge everything they know about your behaviours from their other services, and serve ultra specific creepy ads?

Everyone wants their cake and to eat it.

Paywalled content providers want to charge for their content but have Google index it. Readers want to read stuff for free but block ads.

I think the solution is fewer ads, more paid content, more offers related to the free content, more sponsored free content. Ads can be used more for branding rather than direct sales, and so therefore less tracking is required, it would be more like TV.

P.S. A great example of sponsored free is hacker news!

2 cont.) and because ads are noisy, invasive, garish, and distracting.

Let's not solve this by figuring out how to circumvent ad blockers.

One idea I've been toying with is a system where I can pay the content creator directly. Good article? Have a nickel. Funny YT video? Here is a dime. Skip the middle man. Patreon does something like this, but we need a system that is anonymous, scalable to the whole internet, and above all, easy to use.

Absolutely! Some websites I can't even scroll properly without disabling ads. I like the Patreon idea, because of not middleman, so it certainly appeals to an audience. But I don't think its scalable. With ad networks like Google, I do not have to create an account anywhere, or link my credit card. Google takes care of compensating both content creaters and advertisers.

This can already be done, but the micropayments start at $1 and the content creator gets about 67¢ of it. The sweet spot is a $5 tip, where the vast majority goes to the content creator:

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/11/how-to-make-...

That's still an awful lot of money. I would be much less likely to tip if I was shelling out $1+ each time. Nickles and dimes are pocket change to me, but they add up.

You do not have to tip every single time. But it allows a means to tip, without setting a monthly obligation, like Patreon.

I still plan to set up a Patreon account, but I intend to keep this option open for folks who want to casually support my work without having to make a long term commitment.

I have done some reading and thinking on the subject. There are inherent problems with micropayments that I don't think will ever be resolved with regards to paying the cost of moving the money. I don't think that surcharge will ever get so low that it is viable to leave a nickel or a dime. At best, it might be possible to arrange a prefunded wallet with a service and leave a nickel, but I am not sure if that is viable or even what the point is.

If you feel (for example) that my writing is worth a nickel a page, leave a dollar for every 20th article. It isn't a big thing.

Paying the content creator directly is a much more efficient means of supporting content creation than ads or product sales. While I do have ads on some of my sites (but not on all of them) and while I am still exploring products, like t-shirts and what not, if you spend $20 on a t-shirt, the content creator gets a small cut of that. It puts much more money into their pocket to just tip them $5. So, unless you seriously value that t-shirt and want it in specific, it just makes a lot more sense to tip than to expect content creators to also put time and energy into figuring out product design on top of writing/comicking/whatever.

Frankly, if they are good at creating t-shirts, they can make money at that without necessarily writing. They can do a Zazzle shop or an Etsy shop or whatever. Those folks aren't really in the business of content creation. And it is fine if they like making t-shirts and stuff, but if you really want good content online, it just makes more sense to me for people to tip and pay for the content directly.

If I would make a trackingless ad network I would make it interrest based instead so what you get is relevant to the website you visit and not based on datamining of individuals.

That makes sense. So we can, instead of mining anonymous data about users (like my other comment), can mine the webpage the ad is going to be displayed on. This would make it interest based. Thanks for your input!

One caveat about removing trackers is it opens up for the ability for easily exploitable fraud from botnet users.

That is true. They drive up prices on Google Ad prices. But I feel its a symptom more than the problem. Because these ad networks have a per-click payout system, they have to track each and every click. One way to fix this would be to have a constant pay rate regardless of clicks. Something like $X/week or $Y/month, where X&Y can be decided on heuristics I explained in other comment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com