I think we all assume we are seeing the same content on a website. But do we.? Read this quote from an article on the Australian ABC news
“Many people are unaware that the internet they see is unique to them. Even if we surf the same news websites, we’ll see different news stories based on our previous likes. And on a website like Amazon, almost every item and price we see is unique to us. It is chosen by algorithms based on what we were previously wanting to buy and willing to pay. There is little on the web that we share in common.”
So I think it depends what site we are viewing.
I would not like to see this “tailored view” approach spread to information sites. Maybe it is OK for shopping sites, but I want my information to be ‘true’ rather than tailored to fit my previous behaviour.
The same applies to AI sites. After they ‘get to know’ you from previous queries, will they tailor their replies or will they be objective? Two persons should get the same answer to the same question.
What do you think about personalising website content.?
I think it should be illegal.
It’s good to be aware this type of thing happens. We need to be reminded from time to time.
There is no way it should be made illegal. It’s their website, they can show what they want. No one is required to view the website. If people don’t like what they see they’ll go elsewhere, and the site will suffer the consequences.
I dont see the same thing between my tablet and my linux mint computer both using google chrome as my browser and same accounts on both.
When I select new tab on tablet I get a who range of suggestions relevant to me and my interests, plus suggestions which I am able to say yes or no to further info from that site or subject. Makes the tablet more interesting on subjects I may not think about.
Youtube does the same on both platforms mint and tablet but trying to get rid of a youtube suggestion is much harder.
Couldn’t agree more, but still it works (kind of) this way.
Yes, I was aware of this, this is the root cause of the bubble phenomenon.
I heard it discussed by clever speakers somewhat 15 years ago, that time it was in conjunction with Facebook.
How it works: the “thing” (Facebook, Youtube, etc.) just wants to grab attention of its users as much as possible. So tries to show content to the like of the user… which the user looks at more happily, and spends more time with…
Now imagine a man who is fan of a soccer team “A”. He gets all the nice reports about the team A, reads all the good opinions about that team, maybe some (but very few) of the articles of the critical tone about team “B”.
In his own world (inside that bubble!) the team “A” is the absolute best, and everyone telling a bit different, even worse, be on an opposite opinion, is a liar, and equals to devil itself.
Now imagine another man, but biased towards soccer team “B”.
He will be in a very similar, but different bubble.
Whenever these 2 men meet in the bus stop, or start to talk in the pub, they will be almost ready to kill each other.
So this is a very dangearous thing!
Now imagine bubbles, like political preferences, and even “imaginary pictures of enemy”, what we get is the classical “divide et impera”.
That’s why I try to read news and articles from different sources, not just from those which serve them according to my personal “likes” and preferences.
It’s not that I can accept the different opinion easily (I admit, I may be in my own “softer” bubble), but at least I see the points of the other side.
The definitive answer to the original question seems to be “no, we don’t”.
That’s apparent, but can we do anything against it?
In some cases it is not their content.
For example in looking up a scientific reference, I might go to a site that has a .pdf file. I would like it to be original, not tailored to what they think I need to read.
When I buy a book , the content is guaranteed to be original and untampered. Why should a website be allowed to deviate from that basic rule.?
I’ve been attended to a lots of conferences about marketing.
Not because I’m interested, but because it was the job to do
Businesses have their webpage, it’s theirs. They have a so called “landing” page, where a visitor (possible buyer) - they call it “lead”- gets directed to.
They have a huge lot of variations of those “landing” pages, and constantly monitor, how those pages “convert”. In their wording “conversion” means, the possible buyer really buys that something.
So a page “A” may distract you, but a page “B” makes you to decide to buy (download) that thing.
Based on statistics, different kind of users are directed to differently tailored lading pages. Google, Amazon, etc. try to profile you, and make you visit page “A” which more probably “converts” you.
You just can’t avoid that.
But whenever you go and get the thing, it will be the same.
So that pdf is not taylored, I think (and hope).
that´s quite an interesting topic you came up with. Thank you.
Hmm, I was wondering:
previous likes
what we were previously wanting to buy …
How does the website maintainer know things like that?
I guess cookies are stored somewhere. What else? Surely it has to be more complicated than that… .
Of ocurse the following would not be a practical thing to do on a daily basis.
Perhaps once in a while…
Would this work? :
Assuming you´d be able to use a freshly installed browser, which has never seen any website before.
Then look up the information (e.g. of a news site) you want to see.
Wouldn´t this pristine browser be able to serve the information you´re looking for in a pretty unbiased way
If so, then this might be of some help:
firejail --private firefox [URL_OF_WEBSITE]
After shutting it down and executing the command again you´ll be able to start afresh.
Just wondering. At the moment I cannot think of anything better… .
Yes, your browser is unbiased ( I hope) ,
the problem is tbe website recognises you, and tailors what it presents to your browser.
Amazon, apparently , watches what you buy and how much you pay, then presents to you selected products with prices to match what they think you will pay. That is aweful… they hide some products and present to you more expensive equivalents… or even worse… change the price to what they think you would pay.
It really is buyer-beware.
Yes, it should be. Of course you may choose a browser according to your personal preferences. The firejail command should work the same way with any of them.
O.K., but how does it do this
If a pristine browser isn´t enough to avoid recognition of the user then there must be some other deeper-rooted technologies at work, right?
The only other thing I can think of at the moment is the user´s IP address. tor-browser might be a solution to that (preferably in combination with firejail --private).
O.K., that´s clear then.
In my scenario I was referring to visiting e.g. a news site which doesn´t require a login-procedure.
That´s a wise thing to do.
But in the case you may need to create an account because you desperately need some information (not a typical amazon scenario, of course),
you might want to make use of a temporary e-mail address for registration.
Occasionally I use it myself vor various reasons.
I didn´t even have to install it. Just use it as a standalone executable.
Until now it´s been working quickly and reliably.
I think we all need to remind ourselves that new sites are showing us only what they want us to see. Last year there were many large wildfires in Canada. It was all you saw on the news for a few weeks or maybe a couple months. Then some other more “interesting” story came along, and they pushed that story even as the fires continued to burn.
Amazon’s goal is the same as many other sites, to get your business or repeat visits to sell advertising. They try to customize what they show you to increase their chances of doing that. This is bad?
In my view, I’d lots rather go to Amazon and see computers, golf equipment, books, and other things I’m interested in rather than random products. Same for advertising. For example, I am a well-known Apple “hater”, but I sure see lots of Apple advertisements. Whatever algorithms they’re using to pick advertisements to target me must be pretty poor.
Maybe my ad blocking (uBlock) and privacy add-on (Disconnect) protect me better than I think?
No, of course not.
You´re right and in the case of Amazon seeing personalized advertisement is for your benefit.
Seeing things that you like instead of some random presentation is fine in this case.
I think @nevj ´s original concern (and mine as well) was about getting unbiased news content instead of having to deal with some personalized “bubble content”.
I hope I understood it correctly.
Think that is why we dont just read one newspaper but need to read several… i try reading 3 english and one french but they are still heavy influenced by the political editors or owners.
.
.
