<Karen> Scribe: Karen
<Garrett_Johnson_> My slide deck is here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PKHVtO6hgwBJS1vafLyvG_lwupLhfCSelzczvltxjqc/edit?usp=sharing
<scribe> Chair: Wendy
Wendy: Welcome everyone to
Improving Web Advertising Virtual F2F
... hope you have been able to join other TPAC events
... and are looking forward to a set of breakout sessions
scheduled for next week as well
... Give you a brief welcome
... and reminder that this meeting, like all W3C meetings, is
governed by our code of ethics and professional conduct
... we just had a great training session on that
yesterday
... and opportunities to review that material with others in
the W3C community
... Our agenda is posted and sent out; built from many
conversations with the community
... Today we have Demystifying Advertising and Economics of
Identity
... we have also built breaks into schedule
... after break we will hear about Privacy and
Optimization
... and Browser and media modes, led by Wendell Baker
... We will conclude at 19:00 UTC today
... Tomorrow we will pick up on state of the art multi-party
computation; measurement, Gatekeeper
... and time end of tomorrow for wrap up and next steps
... if there is something pressing you would like to make sure
we cover, queue it up there
... if it doesn't fit into the other discussions
... We work in Github repository and take minutes in irc
... and present+ to indicate you are participating
[http:
//irc.w8.org/?channels=#web-adv]
... please q+ if you would like to speak
... not everyone is in there [irc]
... I will also listen to verbal queue pluses and look for
hands in webex
... a lot of screens, so if you can make irc work for you that
is ideal
... with that, I think we can get to any logistical
questions?
Wendy: thanks, Karen Myers for
picking up scribe pen
... reminds me if there is anyone new to the group who would
like to introduce yourself today?
... Jeff, please say hello
Jeff Jaffe: I'm CEO of W3C, thank you for participating
Philippe Le Hegaret: I am the project management lead responsible for the working groups
Wendy: Thanks for joining us
Don: I'm Don Marti, new with
CafeMedia
... working on ecosystem innovation; new web standards to
enable small publishers
Wendy: Welcome, Don
... thanks for joining us
... anyone else?
... Let's jump in
... We have some backgrounders prepared to help set the stage
and bring everyone together
... first Demystifying advertising with Steve Hulkower from
Magnite
... and then Economics of digital ad identity from Garrett
Johnson from Boston University
... if you have questions or clarifications
... you can "q+ to ask"
... let's me know if it's queuing right away, or to ask a
clarifying question
... Let's get to Steve's presentation
Wendy: Ready to go, Steve?
Steve: you will drive and I'll
say next slide
... Good to meet everybody
... Steve Hulkower from Magnite
... I really appreciate what all of you are doing
... hope this is useful
... some may already know all this
... If this is really boring, tell me to go faster
... next slide
... Agenda
... talk about adtech
<wseltzer> Steve's Slides
Steve: picture of me 15 years ago
as a product manager
... product management for 8 years, at Magnite
... started running campaigns for big brands
... learned about adtech
... I put this into rules
... do not read our marketing
... we are good at marketing; make ourselves sound amazing and
doing cool, state of the art tech
... but we exaggerate
<weiler> steve++ for candor
Steve: do not learn from
marketing, press releases; they are high level and
exaggerate
... Second rule is this is simpler than it looks
... Some examples of examples of drawings of how adtech
works
... it is hard
... some pieces don't exist, some do
... they don't all talk to each other at the same time
... they can go in different directions
... layers upon layers
... add complexity and make it hard to draw
... this is the turning money into people machine
... and idea of the players and data and that fun stuff
... three of these visuals
... How programmatic advertising works
... we have incorporated a little bit of privacy
... but still hard to tell what is going on
... IAB slide
... this is the worst one
... different buying types
... different deals, market buys
... this is confusing
... I am not good at art, but here is my rendition
... we have sellers who have ad space and buyers who want to
buy ad space
... Sellers want good ads to show up; they want controls to
support buyers
... and make money; current model for how we compensate
publishers
... on the buy side
... they are trying to serve the right ads in the right
places
... it's about targeting - make sure the right ads show up in
the right places
... frequency control is showing the right number of ads
... then Attribution is about results
... showing user what I want them to do
... that goes to return on ad spend
... if I spend $100 on ad spend, I want to make $110 back on
it
... Most of you are familiar with the Lumascape design
... there are a ton of these guys
... this is a simple version
... Cheifmarktec.com slide - the industry is more like this -
there are a ton of adtech companies in the space
... confusing to show them all
... now you get my rendition
... I put everyone into a small number of boxes
... Everyone uses the same tech
... everyone uses and ad server
... buy side stores image
... sell side delivers the page
... if you need system to collect bids or both, everyone does
this
... things that add to why we do something; creative vendors,
audience modeling, brand protection
... all those companies fall into the data and services
box
... two models of buying
... Direct buying, you have ad tags
... you don't need to bid anymore
... buyer stuffs everything into the ad tag and it's
delivered
... so you just need ad servers
... the other model is programmatic
... that is more complicated
... Programmatic users RTB
... requires a bid sender and receiver to deliver those
ads
... creative still in ad server
... seller delivers ad ultimately
... another layer of bidders taking to each other over RTB
protocol
... Third rule
<jeff_> [RTB=Real Time bidding]
Steve: how an ad gets to a
page
... I call it ad delivery system
... still same concenpt
... ad delivery system gets the code
... not always, but from there you end up in server land
... transmits everything on page from server to server
... the ID for the user is being picked up by that bidding
system from the page
... User agents...targeting buyers
... page URLs target domains to make sure ads appear in right
places
... location, we use IP address; awesome for countries, but not
for zip codes
... all that info is picked up
... next bidding system maps to everyone elses ID and places
calls
... bidders process info
... match to targeting and rules
... figure out which is best ad to serve
... processes publishes business rules and chooses a
winner
... can be 1-4 layers
... a bunch of info gets processed and gets shrunk back
... may happen twice, three, four times
... but it's all the same thing
... all the bidders return info to delivery system and return
code
... ID for the user
... since we are using serveres
... you rely on idea that first link in chain knew who user
was
... first link has to pass ID and know how to map it
... very real times when bidder knows who user is
... but somewhere in chain there is no ID available
... and you lose that important info
... last bid is bidders process request
... what they care about is ID
... powers attribution
... as Garrret will show
... requests without user IDs don't generate a lot of user
demand
... Last part
... Fourth rule: Identity matters
... being ridiculous to show all these companies again
... thanks to whoever built that
... The User ID is super important
... main role of ID is tapping an attribution, but also powers
audience targeting
... sometimes scarey
... but it's the big draw
... Attribution is most important; knowing your money was spent
well, you can adjut
... IDs, @ smash into each other
... comes from same ID
... if you can fix that, that's cool
... ID is super important because you have hundreds of
silos
... everyone collects and stores own data
... some like how data is collected, others not
... we have to communicate with each other
... how we use the data is through that ID
... cookies...we are drowning
... and if you don't fix this, we will be drowning in third
party IDs
... Look forward to a better version of how we do this
Wendy: thank you, Steve
... people with questions specific to Steve can please queue
up
<Zakim> weiler, you wanted to ask re: fundamentals and to ask re: utility of 1p cookies
Wendy: and we will have a larger period of discussion
weiler: thank you for the
presentation
... how does drowning in first party cookies work?
Steve: main switch is
persistence
... third party cookies...stay there and can be transmitted and
mapped
... you can build an ID graph
... of first party IDs and how they turn into one
... shifiting from one third party Id
... in browser
... versus ID for this user on every single publisher, trying
to figure out how to tie together
... and have a zillion IDs
Weiler: you talked about how
fundamental the ID is
... I have seen ecosystems shift before
... as we get different amounts of fraud, prices of ads
change
... balances
... I wonder to what degree if whole ecosystem changes, we
still have advertising that is not individually targeted?
... I still see billboards, TV
... will system rebalance?
Steve: If you all fail at what we
are trying to do, this will rebalance
... what's changing is our ability to track better
... we are not using 75-yr-olds in Iowa who watched your TV
show
... billboards have better measuring
... dollars have been proposition; ability to measure
... on high level
... if that all crashed and burned, you would still have
digital advertising
... and you would figure out better ways to measure
... when you are self-isolated, you can do first party cookie
and attribution
... for open web, all digital ad money flocks to where they can
do this
... cool audiences that look exciting, but attribution is
key
... This industry will survive
... but will be far better off if we can do privacy forward
mode
... fine if we lose audience data
<wseltzer> vq?
Steve: some aren't ok with that but I am
Wendy: Closing queue after
those
... and come back after
Jeff: Thanks for the
presentation; quite interesting
... you siad in end if we lose third party cookies, we will end
up with a mass of first party IDs
... that model of first party IDs being sent around
... is that being incubated somewhere?
Steve: it has already
started
... Prebid has a user ID model
... don't know how many companies are in that module
... more and more prebid module systems to have consistent
identifying to be broadcast out
<Jeff_Wieland> Prebid Userid modules: https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/modules/userId.html
Steve: we on sell side are being
asked to target ids
... shifting to using others' IDs and lots of them
<weiler> "uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading:
<weiler> https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/modules/userId.html"
Steve: more and more being pushed
around
... you can look at Prebids' module; will make you sad
likely
Kris: I was going to comment on
whether or not without programmatic if there will still be
advertising
... I agree there will be ads online if programmatic doesn't
exist
... but industry shifted to programmatic because it shows how
consumers convert
... it will be a worse experience if we only do contextual and
lose programmatic
... not argument of is there advertising
... but argument is whether people are interested in
buying
... not look at it as something only interesting to buy and
sell sides
... it matters to consumers as to why it should still be
supported
Steve: thank you
bleparmentier: I want to
... say not exactly what Kris said
... there will be some of that, it's certain
... when you do an ad, this is lost
... at overall level
... without targeting, we will show irrelevant ads
... ad spend return goes down
... ads go elsewhere
... to walled garden that keeps info
... to TV
... this will mean reduced publisher revenue
... less spend because we cannot measure or optimize
... important to keep it
... there will still be advertising
... publishers will put up pay walls
... in my mind
... we need to find something that works
... Say something else that Steven said
... need to find something that finds something that works well
enough
... if not usable, I am afraid people will use emails, which
are PII
... and that will lead to less profitable web for publishers
and worse privacy
... PIIs will be exchanged everywhere
... I think...explain why it is very important to find
something that works well enough
... and replace
... and not find ways around the new restrictions
Wendy: Thank you
<Garrett_Johnson_> My slide deck is here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PKHVtO6hgwBJS1vafLyvG_lwupLhfCSelzczvltxjqc/edit?usp=sharing
Wendy: this has helped to tee up
the big questions this group is trying to address
... How to build an ecosystem that works for everyone
... and works in the middle of these transactions, and how to
serve them
... thanks for kicking us off with the importance there
... Shall I drive your slides?
Garrett: I will drive
... can you hear me?
Wendy: yes
Garrett: thank you
<wseltzer> Garrett's slides
<weiler> [seems to make a case for per-party email addrs.]
Garrett: many of the questions
that came up will be addressed
... I am professor of marketing at Boston University
... an expert in ad identity
... I'm a Canadian who grew up on the prairies
... I have a 2020 publication that addresses this issue, my
research examines issues in this space
... Look at GDPR
... and co-author of ghost ads methodology
... I think I am only academic on these calls
... bring an outside perspective; no stake, just hoping for
good policy
... Three questions to discuss
[slide]
Garrett: Begin with the value of
cookies
... focus on the status quo
... last presentation brought up the issues of why cookies are
important
... programs the three key value generators
... sexy stuff is targeting
... but reach management is valued by all advertisers
... this identity has solved eyeballs problem
... do cross-site attribution and evaluate advertising
... these targeting and measurement tools allow optimization at
scale
... Several studies have looked at the value of cookies
... without cookies, prices fall by up to 70%
... important to think about what these studies do or don't
do
... Begin with paper by Goldfarb & Tucker (2011)
... they found measurements of purchase intent (ad
effectiveness) fell by 65%
... these are chaired professors at MIT and Univ of
Toronto
... EU in 2020 provides world post cookies
... we don't get revenue figures for study and data are 20 yrs
old
... next is Beales & Eisenach (2014) study
... ads without cookies have 66% lower prices
... they provide revenue and price info
... industry study
... some lack of attention to detail
... a couple "i's" to be dotted
... My research
... we studied opt-out
... opt-out users have 52% lower ad exchange prices
... we find this drop is spread proportionally to these
different agents in the marketplace
... this is a published and peer reviewed paper
... limitations is we looked at opt-out impressions versus
cookieless, and looking at one ad exchange
... another study Marotta, Abhishek, & Acquisti
... they say ads without cookes have 11% lower publishing
revenues; but another model says 4% lower publisher
revenue
... this paper has not been peer reviewed
... raw difference in prices in 37%
... a big question is how you get from 37 to 4%?
... I think authors got a bit carried away
... long version can wait until Q&A
... Google study (2019)
... came up with same 52% lower revenue without cookies
... Used randomized experiment
... and looked at top 500 publishers on Google
... some of you may be skeptical
... some detail in study, but not a lot
... UK CMA Report (2020) looked at the same Google data
... removed users without cookiers
... accounted for missing unsold impressions
... i was impressed with this work
... Googles does not control the entire adtech stack
... other DSPs were getting cookies and that affects the result
as well
... Additional evidence
... much lower prices from Safari/Firefox users
... drops in FB publisher revenue
... My broad takeaway
... Ad ID increases ad revenue by 2X-3X
... this is the conclusion that I come to you with
... Question of what advertising looks like without
cookies
... Assumption that market will adjust and money will
flow
... important to think about how will market be different
... think about different advertisers and how they will
respond
... Brand advertisers tend to cling to premium publishers; but
they really want cross-site frequency
... Direct advertisers are more about money in, money out
... value the consumer intent
... put a premium on ad measurement, attribution and ability to
optimize
... expect ad pie to shrink and be divided more unequally
... there are some case studies
... NYTimes.com increased revenue
... might be flight to safety where not everyone is protecting
privacy
... also in The Netherlands, NPO increased revenue
... From my industry, if you offer a lesser product
... there will be challenges
... we have seen reduced revenue today for Zoom-only
educational model
... speaks to economics in advertising
... When we get rid of cookies
... Context, sign-ins, walled gardens, and W3C work, which I
will refer to as "the birds"
... Context has work to do to recover the revenue
... general content performs worse than niche content
... we know this from the data
... Goldfarb and Google papers who this
... if you are showing finance users finance content, that is
going to be more valuable than cook book content
... challenge algorithmically
... referred to as the "sperm whale" problem
... and algorithm is going to tell a publisher to stay away
from a page that mentions "sperm" ten times or more
... price may go up when some advertisers hold back their
spend
... and another potential danger is not scale to satisfy
budgets
... of the advertisers, so pie shrinks
... if you are publisher with brand safety benefit, you will do
better
... but context should recover the 2x-3x
... but context competes with sign-in and walled gardens
... a concern for small publishers is if you lose more than
2-3X
... move to sign-in
... provides and identity solution
... first party cookies reference
... this provides a cross-device identifier which is
useful
... but you get lower scale
... makes it harder for small advertisers to participate
... winners and losers depends upon who has first party
relationship with users
... Dollar Shave club has this info, but Campbells and Quaker
Oats do not
... creates barriers for advertiser who do not have these email
addresses
... and creates tension
... over coordinating identity solution
... challenge is there will be some benefits
... for reason we talked about on last slide - make slide
bigger
... so again, we expect pie to shrink
... irony that cookies being replaced by emails that are
personally identifiable
... do require consumer consent
... next come to walled gardens
... Rich get richer
... giants will be hurt by limiting 3rd party data
... FB has 40% of display ad spending, cross device, have
scale
... get value from long tail advertisers
... Google represents 40% of digital ad spending
... cross-device ID among logged-in users
... have scale
... facility for advertisers to be a one-stop shop
... we expect walled gardens to do better in this new
world
... i have been participating on these calls since
January
... I am struck by the intelligence and hard work of the people
on these calls
... but also understand we filter things depending upon our
perspectives
... I can pretty much predict your perspectives whether you
work for publisher, browser, ad tech
... of it you own ad stack or not
... Important to keep an open mind and learn from each other's
perspectives
... Last question
... be brief and high level
... How can privacy and modern advertising work?
... See "The Birds" work at W3C
... not talk individually but more at the high level problem
trying to solve
... Advertisers don't care about an audience of one
... Advertisers care about reaching audiences; that goal is
consistent with privacy
... advertisers want to measure clicks and conversions
... and which are click-through and view-through
... and advertisers care about retargeting, recency
... which is valuable
... and the very basic, unsexy thing
... advertisers care about reach and frequency, especially
across sites
... and advertisers want to run experiments
... Conclusion here
... is once we layer in all these use cases, the information
becomes more personally identifiable
... doing away with identity is really hard
... first tension is between privacy, and measurement and
targeting
... this is going to be more difficult
... Second tension is competition
... by nature, will be harder for smaller advertisers and
publishers
... Third tension is between centralization and
decentralization
... whether need a trusted gatekeeper
... will be session on gatekeepers later today or
tomorrow
... Concluding thoughts
... this is really important
... danger that pie will shink
... tensions dictate how we will come out of this
... and not have the pie be distributed unequally
<bleparmentier> Just want to say, Amazing prez!
Wendy: Thank you, Garrett; lots
of good info and references to follow up on
... I see a big queue
<kleber_> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PKHVtO6hgwBJS1vafLyvG_lwupLhfCSelzczvltxjqc/edit#slide=id.p1 Garrett's slides
Valentino: this was incredible,
good quality analysis; hope this deck will be available
... revenue response to cookies and noncookies
... see an exaggerated effect
... cookies on one side, not on other
... no one wants that
... take away cookies and becomes status quo
... and drop will be lower
... not sure if studies have confirmed this
... how do you see a good way to respond to this data
... that this is not the case
Garrett: you are correct; agree
effect is exaggerated
... but not starting off with 2 or 5 %
... looking at 50-70%
... but doing better could still lose a lot on the table
... speaks to economics of ID
... they are extremely valuable
... why are we moving to a world with first party identifiers
and emails
... tremendously valuable
<weiler> scribe: weiler
<inserted> scribenick: Karen
Garrett: means these contextual solutions for smaller publishers who have to compete with walled gardens and first party solutions will have a really hard time
Aram: I agree there is a
difficulty to understand these things
... where advertisers go from data rich to data poor bid
<weiler> aram: f/u on valentino: difficulty understanding measurement in status quo, when advertsiers can go from data-rich to data-poor bid.
Aram: like 70% a total loss, make it worse
<weiler> ... maybe we make that a little worse.
Aram: entire marketplace
changes
... do we really have enough data in these studies that this
will cause money to leave the digital ad marketplace and go
somewhere else
<weiler> ... if there are only data-poor bids, do we have enough data to show that $ will leave?
Aram: you talked about impact on
small publishers
... is there any data of small publishers being representatives
of niche markets
... that might be beneficial
... of course I have perspective of large publisher
Garrett: data I presented were
from both large and small publishers
... if you cannot offer cross device and @ attribution, it is
more difficult
... market is unknowable; haven't done this experiement
... not in Europe post GDPR
... have to rely on how valuable identity is and what are
solutions that can take the change
... you brought up point from data rich to data poor
... post market adjustments; agree that will be reduced
... not so bad
... but in post market adjustment, we will still see data rich
and data poor adjustments
... walled gardens and sign-in models will be more data
rich
... will make it harder for smaller publishers to compete
... If you are a niche advertiser and flying blind
... some of these players
will disappear from the marketplace
... concern with advertisers reducing spend
Aram: will we see regulatory effects that will change how you estimate the impacts?
Garrett: good question
... post-cookie world will largely be a largely GDPR compliant
world
... may be some consent
... if regulators squeeze on opt-in
... will bring levels higher than we see in status quo
Charlie: great talk, really
informative
... question about studies
published
... my understanding is some studies only removed cookies for
personalization
... for targeting
... wonder about studies looking at cookies for relative value
for products
... is there research for value of something just for
measurement
<kris_chapman> +q
Charlie: strip out the
personalization piece
... and look only at measurement
Garrett: FB studies speaks to loss of personalization
<Alan> [103 people in the meeting - WOW]
Garrett: question of measurement
has not been addressed
... hard to view one without the other
... interesting question
... we don't have data on that
... If you have more data about a user can you do better
prediction of clicks
... thanks, Charlie
dkwestbr: thanks, Garrett
... one, do you perceive potential
... where ten dollars might go...dynamics with walled gardens
and premium publishers in contextual context
... Steve brought up, part of differentiation of digital ads is
differentiaion
... maybe go back to linear TV
... go back to status quo
... studies done on how things work today
... only potential is how these solutions look inside of
Apple
... Scadnetwork
... been out for a few years; perhaps can give us a better
picture of where things are headed
Garrett: Apple is looking at
this
... maybe burning down not best choice until there is a
replacement
... differentiation with @
... growth of digital ad spending is eyeballs
... spending more time on devices than newspapers and
television
... optimization...
... if you lose that I expect movement towards other
things
... other things is advertisers move $ from display into
search
... might be one adjustment
... we will continue to spend more time on devices
... this may obfuscate the shrinking pie; great question
Mike_Pisula: I represent buyers;
part of agency holding company
... I think we are ignoring a problem
... Safari - no third party cookies
... advertisers want to reach consumers but we cannot do
that
... the first-party workarounds, the fingerprinting so
bad
... privacy sandbox looks like a more scalable way
... my advertisers want to spend money
... studies are binary; no cookies, no targeting
... but doesn't have to be way it is today
... we have a problem so let's create a better solution
Garrett: with some humility
... extent to which Firefox and Safari...defy spending
... identifiers use is a bit counter to this
... that you can target on Chrome sustains the barrage
... why not seeing more to invest in tech for post cookie world
where some of world is already there
... good to hear that advertisers want to spend the money
arnaud_blanchard: I really liked
presentation and the pros and cons of the arguments
... ad revenue would shrink is important statement
... agree with most of what you said
... unless we try it not sure
... second one
... very few arguments; it will be divided more unequally by
design
... if you look at everything done around cohorts
... targeting business
... unequal access to the ad ecosystem
... some publishers are obfuscated
... unequal access between small and big publishers
... that you have data...small and large publishers
... data is growing at square root of data set
... privacy sandbox increases the inequality
... this is really something that should be noted
... and undisputed and discussed as a topic
... thank you for bringing that to the whole community's
attention
Garrett: I laid out tensions in my summary
<Zakim> weiler, you wanted to discuss confirm how email addrs are being used now
Garrett: Arnaud's points are important for understanding what these mean at scale
Sam: you mentioned that email addresses would be share more in a post-ID world
Garrett: industry better to speak
to it
... large companies like TradeDesk and LiveRamp
... looking to scale to publishers
... we see more sign-in walls because they want this
identity
... that's all I can say
dialtone: There is third party or
first party cookie ends up in map where key is the email
address
... and inverse
... can look up first party cookie of new publisher and jump to
user profile
Sam; how widespread?
Valentino: going on for
decades
... a low scale
... advertisers don't force people to login
... but it's a viable infrastructure
... if industry is forced
... together we find privacy solutions
... industry looking at back stop using identity trying to make
it as privacy forward as possible
... does not use an unreliable third party cookie
... not to benefit of large advertisers or buyers
... that is discussion going on right now
... not a good solutions for a solution for old problems
... maybe trading off a set of old problems
... follow-up question
... Largely I agree with...isolation of bigger players that
have first party relationships
... if open web did not monetize as well
... there will be less content, and less content means less
revenue from search
... so Google will suffer
... and FB has articles shared through other sources
... I see the one-eyed blind man metaphor
... that is my POV
Garrett: i agree with that
... it is sensible
... from my vantage point
... we have this engagement and set of solutions
... especially because the Chrome team cares about the open
web
... that is why we are here, even with our own business
interests
<Zakim> kleber_, you wanted to ask about the overhead of the non-cookie identity solutions
Wendy: The W3C is critically concerned with keeping the web open for all
Michael: I think you are exactly
right why we at Chrome are interested in the long-term health
of the web
... I am the bird keeper
... listening to discussions
... Steve pointed out Prebid User ID Sub-Modules 19 ways to get
ID
<Jukka> I see a market for one-time email addresses (like Apple ID) springing up :)
Michael: but not satisfying for
many reasons
... any way to get overhead
... on loss of ID solutions; how much that costs
... if cost due to dropping third party cookies if the minus
50-70%
... then "the bird" proposals have a lot to make up
... how much of that loss must we regain
... where we use third party cookie workarounds?
Garrett: the more the
merrier
... the comments I would ad to that
... from outside of industry
... if you replace things with email
... my naive perspective is you are putting same data through
pipes
... where it's interesting is extent to which publishers and
adtech will share across each identifier
... if that is the case, we expect the benefit of
cookies...will be less so
... that makes "the birds" task easier if you are sharing for
these first parties
... vs. cookies with all these problems
Wendy: We are nearly at the
break
... a couple more on queue
Kris: Respond to Sam's question
on volume of email identifiers
... Google and FB support sending audiences to them using
PII
... Salesforce does that and has partnerships with both of
them
<kleber_> Thanks again, Garrett. Also please restart your copy of Chrome. That red "update" arrow in the top-right corner makes me uncomfortable
Kris: not using cookies but
uploading emails
... and translate to own cookie space
... programs support other PIIs such as phones and
addresses
... we have seen it is 100% off the email addresses the things
that match
<Garrett_Johnson_> Thanks @mkleber_ , didn't notice that! Will update.
Kris: large walled garden players cannot identify those; very focused on the emails
bleparmentier: we sign in
... will be easy and superior
... will publishers start to bother users to get emails
... because the birds are too hard
... TD and Sparrow will succeed if we can go to a site
bleparmentier: I hope it will not
be GDPR
... click and give address, email, blood type, wife's name
before you go to a web site
... there will be some workaround
... if we do good work on the birds
... if we don't do a good job
... there will be the 50% drop; if we get back 40% good; if
only 10 we lose
... say that question is how much a publisher will ask
... and impose on a user
Garrett: are we at time, Wendy?
Wendy: yes, we are
... We have a 30-minute break
... people are welcome to stay on the line for some
socialization
... if you want to take a rest, get some food, please rejoin us
at top of the hour
... for topics of optimization
<wseltzer> [break]
<wseltzer> THANK YOU KAREN!
<kleber_> @Karen you're awesome
/me blushes; tries to keep up but some people talk really fast :)
<wseltzer> [return at 1700 UTC]
<AramZS> For those interested in the user impact, experience and feedback around ad tech methods, we will def be digging into that in the upcoming session.
<kleber_> FYI, the increase in users clicking X to complain about the ads they see is from the final paragraph of the Google no-cookies A/B experiment whitepaper https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/disabling_third-party_cookies_publisher_revenue.pdf
<kleber_> Garrett: The speaker is Wendell Baker from Verizon
<weiler> scribenick: weiler
<kleber_> @hober sorry I missed what you said during the break — bad time to run out to get coffee. Did you signal support for any particular use cases?
aram: we've had conversations re:
parts of ad stack, use cases. all of us have some degree to
which we want to say we represent users
... but different perspective.
... recent Q's re: optimizations and priv in ad tech.
... We've missed some perspectives on root causes. what users
are seeing, perspectives of general community.
... I've invited people who ahv been doing research and
reporting on this.
... Harriet Kingby, former Moz fellow, chairs of Conscious
Advertising Network. completed report on @4.
... Aaron Sankin, The Markup.
... Shoshana Wodinsky, Gizmodo
harriet: I am cochair of conscious ad network. voluntary coaltion, ~90 orgs
<wseltzer> https://www.consciousadnetwork.com/
harriet: mission statement of helping ethics catch up with the tech. we believe adv. is negatively impacting society. six manifestos re:
<AramZS> Hi all, here is a list of our speakers, some of the work they have done and additional resources - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BZrAXjydtzzufDWOaPAS1oDKYsAHmic5juNUxKVnW4s/edit?usp=sharing
<wseltzer> CAN Manifestos
harriet: @7. Advertising
inadverently funding @8.
... six areas of concern. want to take conversation beyond
privacy. real world impacts... want to reframe issues.
... What happens when you include two forms of AI in ads? ML -
since currently incorporated. and emotional recognition - on
the cusp of being involved.
... @9 used to identify peopel for advertising.
... Run this through @10 to take a consumer perspective to
impact how this might be impacting trust in adv.
... Severn harms identitied. discrimination, restriction of
choice,
... lack of consumer agency - can't chose vendors processing
datas.
... looked at scams - how could make scams more targetred and
in theory more @11.
... and looked at @12 [people not online?]
... and environmental impacts. and hate speech.
... tech to infer secual orientation from face.
... Report makes recommendations for cross-functional forums
like CAN.
wendy: would love links to these materials.
aram: links in the doc I
shared.
... add more in IRC.
<wseltzer> Aram's overview doc with links
aaron sankin: reporter with The Markup, a nonprofit investigative news org, launched feb 2020. do data-based
aaron: reporting on privacy
issues, algorithmic accountablity.
... looked at how @13 are psreading their message. Now
adtech.
... Project "Blacklight" ... you're talking re: attribution...
blacklight looks at data collection. loooks at where data ia
going - give users a chance to understand what is
happening.
... @14 built this.
... enter URL, blacklight does tests as a headless browser,
looks a t attempts to set cookies, what domains get data.
... looks for canvas FP, keylogging.
... links via duckduckgo.
... w3.org came up very clean. jetblue.com does much
tracking.
... used this at scale to scan 80k of top 100k urls on tranco
list.
... most have 3rd p tracking, most google
... I used blacklight to scan sites serviing privacy-sensitve
groups, e.g. undoc immigrations, abuse surfaces, sex workers,
LGBTQ people.
... govt sites re: reporting child abuse.
... Big take-away: many sites didn't know what their site was
collecting. things came in as presets from site that built
site.
... Showed me site ops are just as confused by ad tech
infrastructure as end users.
... These aren't sites highly invested in ad tech. most not
doing major user tracking. no big ad campaigns.
... showed me that current adtech instructure, which informs
how web is set up, to encorage much tracking, in ways these
site ops not comfortable with
... they had to make a devil's bargain - send data in order
tohave robust, functional site.
... site ops uncomfortable w collection; not particularly
savvy. from users, generally creeped out.
... could put in plug-ins, but breaks websites, gives you less
relevant ads.
... users are asking "what can we do" and "how do we keep
ourselves safe". answers not very fulfilling.
... Orgs that scan own websites uncomfortable - they don't see
benefits to themselves.
... Lots of confusion. from users and site ops.
<dialtone> oh, ok
aaron: Also looked at how sites
interacted w/ people in bad ways. e.g. targetting people
interested in pseudo science w/ ten-foil hat ads.
... happened to me.
aram: q's at end.
shoshana: I report on priv at
gizmodo.
... In trade press, don't talk much to consumers - use panels,
surveys. many issues boil to transparency + choice.
... Current ecosystem provides neither, even if we tell them we
do.,
... When I was an adtech reporter, this came up every
day.
... WSJ in Feb: cell location provider had a side biz selling
data to feds for immigration enforcement.
<kleber_> (whew, I was worried that was *my* computer with a low battery for a minute...)
shoshana: Police could bypass
warrants, since it was commercial data.
... Editor asked if we could figure out what apps people were
using at border. Gravy Analytics - the location provider - they
worked with liveramp and other DMP's.
... after a month, told editor - fundamentally impossible to
say which aps are sharing data. that's terrifying.
<wseltzer> [DOOH=Digital out-of-home]
shoshana: I reported: I found was
being targetted w/ Instagram ads re: my AD&D. tried to find
out where it came from: GoodRx. They were sharing details with
Braze (CRM povider). med, dosage, pahrmacy.
... ultimately, not sure where it came from.
... folsk on consumer side don't understand how convoluted this
landscape is.
... because dig ad is so unregulated. this is completely legal.
and as a result you have people targeted w/ ads based on mental
health, and the border issues. Law is behind
... People like targetd ads but what if that data is shared
with the feds? employers? or involves sensitive topics.
... As for choice: chrome "bug" deleted data EXCEPT from gogole
sites.
... Pattern of bad practices. [see slide]
... Left with getting targetted ads, not by choice, even if
telling them otherwise.
... Hard to know who's doing bad stuff. Is there a way to
totally opt out? A: no. fundamentally impossible. could be
tripped out by ad id; data in bidstream.
... very fragile system. because I used to write re: adtech and
couldn't opt out, end user w/ no fundamental understanding ....
it's impossible. even if you say there's choice, if you make a
choice impossible, no choice.
... People want to know where data is going. they want opt-out
to be meaningful, and they want to be spoken to like actual
human beings. need to bridge dividie between industry and
public.
swodinsky@gizmodo.com
<wseltzer> scribenick: wseltzer
<weiler> aram: this came together quickly. blame re: irregularities
<Zakim> kleber_, you wanted to ask Aaron about Google Analytics first-party-identity and "tracking technology"
kleber_: thanks to all three of
you
... to Aaron, we've spent lots of time distinguishing between
first and third parties
... I was surprised in the Blacklight report to see Google
Analytics lumped with Ads
... since Analytics doesn't cross site boundaries
... it creates ad audiences on a fraction of sites that use
remarketing
... the extra 24% of "google tracking technology" is
single-site, I think
... I'd be interested in your thoughts on usefulness of that
distinction
Aaron: I don't think people
distinguish between first and third parties
... or understand cookies
<jrosewell> +1 to Aaron that people don't understand difference between first and third party cookie
Aaron: The way we set up our
system does lump all Google things together
... building on Duck Duck Go's tracker radar
<kris_chapman> GA does also drop the third-party doubleclick cookie too to support those ad use cases
Aaron: good point re where GA
fits into larger ecosystem
... GA is siloed, but if enable advertising freatures, drops
DoubleClick cookies
... even for me took a long time to understand
... Complicated for site operators
... e.g. talked to ProtonMail, who didn't want to let anyone
onto their site, rolled their own analytics system
... other examples
... internal policy controls at Google as to where data goes;
can be difficult for the public to understand
jrosewell: I'm reminded I'm a
statutory director of a UK company, with GDPR fines
... to Aaron, is there any difference between European sites
and other jurisdictions?
Aaron: Blacklight is a headless
browser, doesn't navigate GDPR consent forms
... if we hit a site, and no cookies are dropped, comes up
clean
... suggested lots of instances where cookies aren't
firing
... Some examples, HuffPost.com vs HuffPost.co.uk. US site
drops cookies, UK site clean
... Talked to people who do consulting, including a few places
with "cosmetic" GDPR consent buttons
... but many with functional consent buttons. larger question
what consent actually means
jrosewell: thanks for the observation of some effect of regulation
<Zakim> dialtone, you wanted to Why are those sensitive sites putting up trackers?
dialtone: thanks all.
... Agree with the points re transparency, sensitive
sites.
... As a company, we try to steer away from sensitive topics
and ads
... for the societal impact.
... How do you square the theory of what people say they
like/are freaked out by,
... with the majority of Hulu users who don't pay $4/month more
not to see ads
... and GoodRX is an affiliate business, clearly funded through
ads
... How do you square those perspectives?
<weiler> [a value exchange that you just admitted they likely don't understand]
Shoshana: GoodRX users may be
needing discounts on drugs they need to survive
... privacy may be a luxury that not everyone can afford
... Some people are ok with that tradeoff; some don't like
society being stratified
... Re disclosure to Facebook, people may not know how pixel
works
Aaron: lots of Internet companies
premised on giving things away
... sets expectations
... the same may be happening to site operators, who don't know
what happens with free social sharing buttons
Harriet: tradeoffs between cheap
hardware and privacy; we found patents for TVs that would use
emotion recognition technology to tailor ads
... when we look at trust in advertising
... lots of components
dialtone: value exchange. There's
a comparable product that lets you pay and offers more
privacy
... at the end of the day, building services isn't free.
Someone has to pay
... the cost is often filled by advertising, affiliate
marketing, etc.
... Not clear we're asking users the right questions
Shoshana: I agree. A failure of
communication not just from reporters, also from
industry.
... that people don't understand what's going on
<jrosewell> Agree with Shoshana that people don't understand privacy or the value exchange.
Shoshana: no way to know that if you live at the US-Mexico border, a game app may share data on your family with authorities
Garrett_Johnson_: re Shoshana's
reporting, sharing this sensitive data with third parties is
problematic
... but targeting sensitive categories based on context is
something we should be open to
... on-site, vs following to another website
<kris_chapman> regardless of advertising, I think the public needs to change their belief that the internet is free - or that anything they read online is true, too
<Garrett_Johnson_> Research on how GDPR affected 3rd party domain interactions on websites. Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/garjoh_canuck/status/1189530013567205377?s=20. Talk tomorrow info here: https://sites.google.com/view/macci-epos-virtual-io-seminar. Videos of past talks here: https://www.garjoh.com/research
Garrett_Johnson_: and post-GDPR, ^
AramZS: Deborah had a brief note
...
... and to Harriet, report on how personalization encouraged
discrimination. Can you share examples?
Deborah_Carver: worked on agency
and local news org sides
... Minneapolis has strong local news
... concern wrt ad tech that often our news orgs don't really
understand the tech they're implementing on their own
sites
... big gap between how news ads are sold and how digital
... and news orgs often end up placing whatever tracking tech
ad sellers offer
... concerning, e.g., following Black Lives Matter
protests
... lack of transparency around tech and middlemen
Harriet: Discrimination through
ad system happens in a number of ways
... algorithmic tailoring is more problematic when relates to
e.g. educational opportunities, housing
... if I'm not shown the same educational or housing choices
someone from a different background gets, that can lower
aspirations, discriminate
<AramZS> @wseltzer are we ok to complete the queue even if we are over time?
Harriet: Discrimination relating
to content. Blocklisting of safe LGBTQ content, "Muslim"; so
media for those communities is difficult to fund
... Demonetizing hard news about coronavirus just as we need it
most
... need to do risk assessment about what kind of
discrimination is inherent or could be created
<jrosewell> Harriet's point about transparency around automated decision making and use of AI probably the biggest tech challenge for this decade. Does the W3C have a group working on this?
arnaud_blanchard: along with how
and to whom data flows, how much of the data
... variants of data and how personal it is
... explaining how much data is going where and for what reason
is important
... Blocklisting is problematic because it forces
content-producers to tailor content to what advertisers
need
... minimizing targeting will increase this effect, I
fear
... I don't think characterizing me based on what I read is
fair to me or to the publisher
Harriet: Some organizations do
place advertising on specialized content, as a counter to
blocklisting
... my suspicion is that we don't need all this data all the
time for tailoring
... checkmyads, we advocate for supply chain
accountability
... because the supply chain is so complex, there's no
accountability when something goes wrong
... CAN advocates, make better inclusion lists
... don't always rely on tech to solve the problem
... advertiser responsibility for where ads are going
AramZS: Thanks to our guests today, and apologies for going over
weiler: thanks Aram, and Harriet,
Aaron, Shoshana
... to Valentino, your question about affiliate links, and lack
of understanding...
valentino: some people are well aware and happy to save
<jrosewell> Shoshana and Harriet raised some good examples of unacceptable privacy violations. Drug prescriptions details, turning on cameras to recognise faces, location data, etc.
<jrosewell> Aaron explained that GDPR does show promise in addressing bad actions by bad actors. We can now clearly see that not all answers to privacy problems are to be found in tech.
AramZS: Thanks again!
<jrosewell> Sharing more directly identifiable personal information with a smaller number of larger companies isn’t a remedy to the privacy issues raised. Garrett recognised this in Q&A.
<jrosewell> Whilst reducing the number of participants in the market might make it easier to trace data that is passed between different entities it will obscure data processing in practice and reduce consumer choice.
<jrosewell> Focusing on strengthening the audit (supply chain accountability) and sanctions around data transfer and processing increasingly looks like the demonstrably best method of “Improving Web Advertising” which is the objective of this group.
AramZS: feel free to reach out to participants for follow-up, and I'd love to return to this conversation
<jrosewell> That means working on solutions that aren’t 100% about tech, but also about laws and policies.
<weiler> [it's hard to accept shifting that burden to individuals, esp. if they've already been victimized in other ways]
<dialtone> who should make the call though if not them?
<dialtone> we can't possibly claim power to decide if $2 is the right value for a GoodRx affiliate conversion for everyone
<dialtone> frankly, if some aspects of advertising are too sensitive then the regulatory body should step in and just forbid it outright
<weiler> [acknowledging economic network effects, it's more of 'why should they be forced to give up the social value of a big network (e.g. FB) just because they need to hide from someone. it's an imperfect question, but it highlights shifting the burden to the individual]
<jeff_> scribenick: jeff_
Wendell: WE talked about Media
Mode
... added the word Magazine
<dialtone> afaik FB has privacy controls that prevent all targeted ads, but one isn't forced to use FB, I certainly don't use it, although I'm a sample of 1
<wseltzer> Wendell's slides
Wendell: TL;DR... simplification
is the order of the day
... We've been doing this for a few weeks
... browsers; ad-tech crew
... we need to finish this up
... where will this end up in 2 years
... in my house: denial? money will come to us? doomsday models
- 60-70% of the spend will disappear
... nuanced business models
... we thought about "Private by Default Web"
... what would be 2023/4 be like?
... we spun up after SD workshop
... been at this for 2 years
... trade, activism, browser people working this for many more
years
... lots of expertise
... but what's the bigger perspective?
... there are things that will never change
... Here are some observations
... browsers are beyond huge
... need lots of money
... like semiconductors
... lots of people try to influence
... in semis - huge battle about putting an ID in silicon
... the activist side does not understand what this does
... the people who run the tech don't know
... system behavior is an emergent property
... you need experience to understand
... but the browser has been the thing that did not
change
... once was superlative
... that's no longer true
... many use cases
... safety, regulatory concerns
... bad people breaking in
... look at CVE list
... media trades people are spending time working around the
rule
... many levels of stack
... Aleecia MacDonald said that the stack is corrupt at all
levels
... so the system is not working
... people are working around the rules
... for us to all get something happening
... need to simplify stack and look at some use cases
... focus on Magazine use case
... let's clarify the problem
... many studies (academic, etc.) do not effect what we do in
business
... but some things do have an effect (later in
presentation)
... dithering causes people to get stuck, so you need to move
around a bit
... [baseball analogy]
... Our focus is lifestyle magazines with personalization
... need to think like publisher
... even people who run the sites don't understand
... like the Editor in Chief does not care how the printing
press works
... so we call it the "HTML industries"
... how do you drive SEO?
... work your business into search engines
... attract and recirculate
... we had thought that the browser was an inert user
agents
... for many years it was true
... now that has changed
... so you have a publisher mindset with servers
... you have clients
... and you have complexity
... many hands in the middle
... need measurement and metering to make it work
... "red" box is difficult stuff
... "green" is what we are doing
... Now let's look at other kinds of media
... there are others
... each are different
... more proprietary
<jrosewell> Business logic suggests the "bit in the middle" generates more revenue for publishers than not having the "bit in the middle", otherwise it wouldn't be used.
Wendell: don't always have groups
like this
... the purple boxes near the ears of the client make all the
difference
... once the inert boxes become less inert
... it doesn't work
... that's what happened in the last 2 years
... from 2 vendors
... inside of Verizon Media we say that the Ad use cases is a
wonderful document
... that we laid out advertising needs and people acknowledge
that they need to be solved
... and what's not on the list won't happen
... there is debate about the machinery will be allowed
... most oriented towards continuity with pre-2020
... but long list of attractions
... manipulation, moral attribution
... I look at whether they are real
... some are names of essays
... "content is king"
... means the audience has to want to come
... other industries don't have this problem
... they have primary stakeholders and others
... we have encryption and DRM on the web
... the rest are distracting
... we understand that this is years away from reality
... no code yet
... difficult to make plans for the next 2-4 years
... other issues: rights, consent, jurisdictionary specified
UIx
... imagine - lawyers are involved
... confidential computing - can it be commercially
viable
... not well matched with the current industry
... not shown yet
... only a few companies with sufficient PhD staff to make it
work
... and SOX compliant
... most of us have seen the birth of the web
... but some engineers have not
... i.e. we are getting older
... the target of magazines are someplace else
... bundles, packages, applets
... newsletters are big deals
... changes the dynamic; traffic acquisition;
identification
... so we are moving to PII; building arrangements
... gives you contract, legitimate interest
... audio and video beyond the web
... lots of time being spent there
... ad stuff will move there
... wrap up: 2 years ago we did user consent and
permissions
... surprising interest on regulation side
... lots of conversation with browsers
... we want a general browser engine
... can do media
... can talk about machine learning
... someone says that browser does not know what is happening
at layer 8 and 9
... so we need to shut it down
... here is a plea to build a browser that understands
this
... tailor towards that
... final point: metering and measurement
... need to model around consent and permissions
James_Rosewell: Thanks for an excellent pitch for Gopher
<weiler> jrosewell++
James_Rosewell: it answers a
question I've had since June
... this helped me understand your thinking
... what is the purpose of the web browser
... you highlighted an existential threat to the open web
... money will go elsewhere
<weiler> [seems like some interesting overloading of the term "open"]
James_Rosewell: I'll think about it. Tx.
Kris_Chapman: Thanks Wendell
<jrosewell> Gopher spec : https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1436
Kris_Chapman: +1 that browsers
need to understand level 8 and 9
... difference between end user tracking v prescription for a
particular drug
... need a signal what might be acceptable
... then system functions well.
Wendell: Penn and Teller talk (sp?) pointed out that people are turning up their arguments
<jrosewell> BTW Turn up to "11" was Spinal Tap
Wendell: a medical site might use data in some way hence can build the technology
<weiler> "
<weiler> ;
Wendell: in our shop we look at
various things including jurisdictional
... if tech can't figure it out we need different tech
Aram_Zucker-Scharff: In terms of
the moral dilemma
... the problem is not what shows up in the press
... but when we see something we can assume there are
others
... should not dismiss single example
... should think about our business needs
... we serve our advertisers but also our readers
... if we continue to generate bad press as ad
technologists
... that will have a non-quantifiable but relevant impact on
our business.
Wendell: Hard to disagre
... I'm in the business
... I see it.
... Need to be legal, but then comes a gotcha
... What kind of apps do we want?
... we want to be in lifestlye magazines
... auto, finance, etc.
... end-terminal equipment not working for them right now
<wseltzer> https://github.com/w3c/web-advertising/blob/master/meetings/TPAC2020.md
Wendy: With an empty q, ^^ is
agenda for tomorrow
... multi party computing for measurement tools
... measurement reporting API proposals
... progress, incubation
... gatekeeper proposals
... browser/server tradeoffs
... certification
... disaggregate privacy preserving tech
... today had great overviews
... think about next steps
... shared understanding of problems, landscape, research
... appreciate all of the participation
... presenters, questioners, thoughtful sharers within your
orgs
... look forward to bring back for more discussion today and
tomorrow
... thanks to Karen, Sam, and the other scribe for picking up
the pen
Joshua: I enjoyed the
presentation
... I struggle to come up with a tech that cannot be
misused
... we don't remove rocks because they are thrown
... are there techs that never cause harm?
Aram: We need seat belts in
cars
... but also people in cars understand the risks
... with ad tech we are seeing here, most consumers are not
capable of making that car
... we want to (a) make technology safe and
... (b) we must give users the ability to understand the
risk
... people understand cars
... in a Tesla and you use autopilot because you don't
understand - the problem is the tech
<Zakim> weiler, you wanted to critique the analogy
Sam: Take apart analogy about
rocks
... I don't keep my guns at the street
<Garrett_Johnson_> FYI, I posted a twitter thread on my earlier remarks: https://twitter.com/garjoh_canuck/status/1318989352534478851?s=20
Sam: so I don't give my tools to
the street to abuse them
... (Something about building codes)
Michael: We have items for
tomorrow to address this
... multiparty computation; gatekeepers
... answer how do we build tech that does not cause harm
... not a guarantee
... but it asks what better we can do
... active discussion
... also must acknowledge the policy component
... technology does not get us the whole way
... end up with safer collection of tools
Paul: A step further from
Michael
... we are thinking about cross-site tracking
... when we hear Shoshana and Harriet talk about concerns
... these harms will still exist in the future
... may exacerbate them
... advertising will be less effective
... strengthen the tech giants
Kris: We talked about how the
general public does not understand
... ad tech has poorly explained
... not taken privacy seriously
... data privacy is important
... needs to be education for general public
... Internet is not free
... not everything online is truthful
... people need to be skeptical and understand the
economics.
... market that to public.
Brad: Better analogy is leaded
gas
... improved tech with same benefits
... also when we deprecated plug-in APIs
... plugins were causing unintended harms
... instead we built out the capability of the web
... build new APIs without use cases
<AramZS> I think there are lesser and greater vulnerabilities we are opening people up to, and removing cross site targeting can lessen that vulnerabilities. I wrote briefly about how the problems of ad tech are of scale and specificity, not a perfectly zero-able problem - https://twitter.com/Chronotope/status/1270508875989561345
<AramZS> Thank you to Wendy for moderating!
Wendy: Great place to
wrap-up
... tomorrow we focus on the APIs
... improvements to ecosystem
... looking forward to seeing you
<wseltzer> [adjourned]
Wendy: Thanks very much
This is scribe.perl Revision of Date Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Holkower/Hulkower/ Succeeded: s/@/what's changing is our/ Succeeded: s/Arnaud/bleparmentier/ Succeeded: s/@/elsewhere/ Succeeded: s/with targeting/without targeting/ Succeeded: s/@/emails, which are PII/ Succeeded: s/shape/Shave/ Succeeded: s/@/Quaker Oats/ Succeeded: s/tion/tino/ Succeeded: s/data@@/data-poor/ Succeeded: s/DDPR/GDPR/ WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/blind WARNING: Bad s/// command: s/informative Succeeded: s/@/linear/ Succeeded: s/@/cohorts/ Succeeded: s/sending to/sending audiences to/ Succeeded: s/@/bother users to get emails/ FAILED: s/too @/too hard/ Succeeded: s/bid.@.../Prebid User ID Sub-Modules/ Succeeded: i|Chair: Wendy|Topic: Intros Succeeded: i|Ready to go, Steve?|Topic: An attempt to demystify advertising Succeeded: i|Garrett's slides|Topic: Economics of Digital Ad Identity Succeeded: i|many of the questions that came up will be addressed|Topic: Economics of Digital Ad Identity Succeeded: i|means these contextual solutions|scribenick: Karen Succeeded: s/optimiations/optimizations/ Succeeded: s/@3/Conscious Advertising Network/ Succeeded: s/@5/The Markup/ Succeeded: s/@6/Shoshana Wodinsky, Gizmodo/ Succeeded: s/sec workers/sex workers/ Succeeded: s/ment/men/ Succeeded: s/yeard/years/ Succeeded: s/pitch/pitch for Gopher/ Succeeded: s/Pen and Tyler/Penn and Teller/ Succeeded: s/causing unintended/plugins were causing unintended/ Succeeded: s/scribe+/scribenick: jeff_/ Succeeded: s/Improving Web Advertising BG/Improving Web Advertising BG vF2F, day 1/ Succeeded: s/Alicia/Aleecia/ Succeeded: s/ birds are too bother/ birds are too hard/ Succeeded: s/start @/start to bother users/ Succeeded: s/too hard users to get/too hard to get/ Present: bleparmentier dialtone ionel sharkey-cafemedia mlerra wseltzer Karen kris_chapman pbannist wbaker_ mjv blassey deepak joshua_koran shigeki kevinG [100people] Found Scribe: Karen Inferring ScribeNick: Karen Found Scribe: weiler Found ScribeNick: Karen Found ScribeNick: weiler Found ScribeNick: wseltzer Found ScribeNick: jeff_ Scribes: Karen, weiler ScribeNicks: Karen, weiler, wseltzer, jeff_ WARNING: No date found! Assuming today. (Hint: Specify the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.) Or specify the date like this: <dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002 People with action items: WARNING: IRC log location not specified! (You can ignore this warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain a link to the original IRC log.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]