I'd love to think that @michaelsheen's thoughts and responses to Welsh nationhood are the start of a new wave of discussion surrounding who, what, why and how of Welsh Independence.
More from For later read
A name has caught the radar of agencies investigating #GretaToolkit- FRIEDRICH PIETER. Delhi Police expressed shock over the appearance of Pieter's name as "Who to Follow" in g-doc as he is under cops' scanner since 2006 for his Anti-India activities. Some shocking details..
1/9
Pieter is close associate (read hired by) Bhajan Singh Bhindar, founder of OFMI (Org for Minorities of India) that considers itself an anti-Gandhi 'crusader' & is Pro-Khalistan. They also campaigned to free Bhullar (convicted Khalistani terr0r!st) & lobby against Modi in US.
2/9
Bhinder has alleged connection with ISI & had records of owning inter-state drugs cartel & DVD piracy for terr0r funding. They also took control Fremont Gurudwara, US back in 2003 for millions of donation. Details of this 'Info-War' by @DisinfoLab
https://t.co/oIDFSoaDX2
3/9
Back to Pieter. Take a glance at his work. His TL is filled with anti-BJP/RSS/Modi propaganda. From his speeches to articles, everything have few keywords in common- RSS/Fascism/gen0c!de/k!ll!ing/Kashmir/Hindutva, as if running a non-stop unrest in India is his bread & butter
4/9
He picks every topic with an extreme narrative that potentially hurts integrity of nation, be it Kashmir,CAA,1984 & with his recent projects- Farmer protest & campaigning heavily against Sri Kulkarni. Despite all, Kulkarni appointed as Chief of Ext Affairs at Biden admin.
5/9
1/9
Pieter is close associate (read hired by) Bhajan Singh Bhindar, founder of OFMI (Org for Minorities of India) that considers itself an anti-Gandhi 'crusader' & is Pro-Khalistan. They also campaigned to free Bhullar (convicted Khalistani terr0r!st) & lobby against Modi in US.
2/9
Bhinder has alleged connection with ISI & had records of owning inter-state drugs cartel & DVD piracy for terr0r funding. They also took control Fremont Gurudwara, US back in 2003 for millions of donation. Details of this 'Info-War' by @DisinfoLab
https://t.co/oIDFSoaDX2
3/9
Back to Pieter. Take a glance at his work. His TL is filled with anti-BJP/RSS/Modi propaganda. From his speeches to articles, everything have few keywords in common- RSS/Fascism/gen0c!de/k!ll!ing/Kashmir/Hindutva, as if running a non-stop unrest in India is his bread & butter
4/9
He picks every topic with an extreme narrative that potentially hurts integrity of nation, be it Kashmir,CAA,1984 & with his recent projects- Farmer protest & campaigning heavily against Sri Kulkarni. Despite all, Kulkarni appointed as Chief of Ext Affairs at Biden admin.
5/9
This response to my tweet is a common objection to targeted advertising.
@KevinCoates correct me if I'm wrong, but basic point seems to be that banning targeted ads will lower platform profits, but will mostly be beneficial for consumers.
Some counterpoints 👇
1) This assumes that consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones.
This does not seem self-evident to me
Research also finds that firms choose between ad. targeting vs. obtrusiveness 👇
If true, the right question is not whether consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones. But whether they prefer *more* contextual ads vs *fewer* targeted
2) True, many inframarginal platforms might simply shift to contextual ads.
But some might already be almost indifferent between direct & indirect monetization.
Hard to imagine that *none* of them will respond to reduced ad revenue with actual fees.
3) Policy debate seems to be moving from:
"Consumers are insufficiently informed to decide how they share their data."
To
"No one in their right mind would agree to highly targeted ads (e.g., those that mix data from multiple sources)."
IMO the latter statement is incorrect.
@KevinCoates correct me if I'm wrong, but basic point seems to be that banning targeted ads will lower platform profits, but will mostly be beneficial for consumers.
Some counterpoints 👇
That targeted ads allow for "free" products for consumers is a common talking point and we're going to see more of it in the coming months.: https://t.co/Xty3My3f0u (1/14)
— Kevin Coates (@KevinCoates) February 16, 2021
1) This assumes that consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones.
This does not seem self-evident to me
Great post by @Sherman1890 got me thinking about the future of targeted ads.
— Dirk Auer (@AuerDirk) February 12, 2021
More and more tools (privacy labels, ad blockers, GDPR) enable consumers to opt-out from targeted ads - can limit the data platforms receive or block ads altogether.
The end of targeted ads? \U0001f9f5\U0001f447 https://t.co/MA6A3BrUWq
Research also finds that firms choose between ad. targeting vs. obtrusiveness 👇
If true, the right question is not whether consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones. But whether they prefer *more* contextual ads vs *fewer* targeted
2) True, many inframarginal platforms might simply shift to contextual ads.
But some might already be almost indifferent between direct & indirect monetization.
Hard to imagine that *none* of them will respond to reduced ad revenue with actual fees.
3) Policy debate seems to be moving from:
"Consumers are insufficiently informed to decide how they share their data."
To
"No one in their right mind would agree to highly targeted ads (e.g., those that mix data from multiple sources)."
IMO the latter statement is incorrect.
You May Also Like
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.