There are many rights called out specifically as "natural rights" or "God-given rights" but your ability to access a data store that is not yours isn't one of them, nor is it among the unenumerated rights alluded to in the U.S. Constitution.
Chrome may be misbehaving. Chrome may be detecting that you have a video downloader plugin and blocking you. Perhaps... Don't use Chrome. I personally recommend Firefox. But one thing Chrome, Google, and YouTube are not doing is infringing upon your rights.
Sure, but you are getting off the course. The ability of a company to know what is installed on my hardware and decide based on this information what to do with it, much broader topic then the access to a storage with a third party content on it.
> For better or for worse Apple's steps are essentially screwing up facebooks business model
If you need an argument in support of why Apple's move is really targeted at publishers like Facebook, take a look at the ATT/app tracking transparency prompt that Apple have designed.
It doesn't call out any of the benefits of allowing tracking (healthy for the free app ecosystem, helps publishers), rather it's just:
"Allow {app} to track your activity across other companies' apps and websites?"
That sounds like a direct, honest and correct explanation of the result of agreeing to the prompt. I see no reason why they should include propaganda from Facebook along with it.
This is honestly pretty reasonable. Apple already knows which apps I download and this is made fairly clear (you're logged into the App Store and your account lists all apps you obtained).
Apple also knows which App Store ads I saw given that their server sent them to me in the first place. The ads are (at least for now) limited to the App Store and don't carry over across the web or other Apple apps.
Thus I don't see the problem with Apple using the data they've already got to provide anonymized conversion metrics to app developers.
Interesting to see on the 'Sorted by Net Shift' tab that a lot of the big risers are hip-hop. Sorted by the rankings in earlier years, these were nowhere to be found.
Well, it’s good to see that net shift. However, the net shift still indicates that they still don’t know what’s good. Kanye and Amy Whinehouse are ranked almost 100 places higher than The Fugees - The Score and Biggy Smalls - Life After Death.
I’m just glad cinema is so international and most of it’s rankings always had diversity internationally that new top lists don’t have to literally over correct in a shallow way to make up for the pure exclusionary judgement making of the past.
I'm an advertiser, worked agency & in-house, and have used approaches like Causal's in the past.
As the other comments mention, simulations aren't going to let you answer these questions if you can't already answer them, but they can provide you with uncertainty ranges which are valuable in their own right.
Particularly if you're agency-side, being able to go to a client with an uncertainty range for some forecasted KPI is so much better than having to give a single number. Works for them because they can understand the risk, and works for you because you're not going to be held to a single number (which you're never likely to hit in practice).
Yeah I've definitely been tempted with adding more ideas like these. The one question I've struggled with, and would be super keen for your thoughts on, is whether it'd look okay to have them on the virtualmuseums.io domain, or whether you think it's worth starting again and trying to capture all the best 'virtual attractions' on a single map?
We've got 1000's of virtual tours of mountains / rivers / reefs / etc. in our library. Drop me an email if you do decide to expand the content (https://www.trekview.org/contact)
100% possible! There's still the question of whether you'd put them on the existing site, or make a new (more general) site to host all the links on. Definitely keen for thoughts as I'm torn between the two
There are Unix programs where a single executable answers to different names, and behaves accordingly (e.g. busybox works as ls or cat or ..., I think).
You could have a single site, with different names, where the filter is preset by the URL used.
Personally, I think I'd keep them on the same site and have checkboxes on the left hand side that could be checked or unchecked for particular categories. (Sort of like how a lot of mapping software works.)
I built it after seeing a bunch of articles listing virtual museums around the world. I felt like part of the point of touring these virtual museums was to capture just a tiny bit of the fun of travelling, but that this is lost when you just scroll through articles.
I thought that it’d be more fun to put all the museums on a map, and let you track your progress as you visit them, as this helps to recreate a tiny part of what’s fun about travelling.
This is an archived copy of a Library of Congress online exhibit from around '93 or so. There's a shoutout marca@ncsa in there, etc. I think there's a very decent chance this was the first 'virtual museum/exhibit' type thing on the web.
You're right that there's more than just last-click cost per conversion, but that doesn't mean this approach is incompatible with these extra complexities.
You might run conversion lift tests as a way to calculate the impact of increased brand awareness, and you could plug the data from these into the method outlined in the post. There you'd be looking for the optimal cost per incremental conversion rather than just optimal cost per conversion.
This is just one idea, hopefully shows that the post's method doesn't have to just use last-click conversion data.
Hi folks, I'm the author of the post — I wrote it because I think a lot of brands tend to pluck numbers out of thin air when they're talking about marketing targets, without knowing how they're affecting their bottom line.
This might seem like econ 101 as zwaps mentioned, but there are a lot of brands who don't take anything like this approach still.
Interesting post. "All models are wrong, some models are useful" - Box. This one seems useful and is simple to explain.
It started me thinking about the distribution of customers who convert, viewed as a function of ad spend. I am not sure there is any reason this distribution need have a particularly simple shape, or even be continuous. E.g. maybe some customers can be addressed and convert at a modest ad spend, while if you double the ad spend you don't get any more conversions, then if you double ad spend again maybe suddenly you're out bidding a competitor and the number of conversions shoots up, perhaps giving you a better overall net profit than if you stopped earlier with a modest budget.
This might mean that the curve we're trying to maximise (net profit) has more than one local maxima, or might not even be continuous.
There's probably also an explore/exploit tradeoff here as well: how much of the total budget should you spend sampling to try out different ad spends across the whole range of plausible values (from 0 up to the long term value of a conversion, I guess) to get enough data to start optimising.
That is a fascinating line of reasoning. I wonder if there is some way to leverage historical data (for other brands, maybe?) to figure out potential local optima.
I original thought this was a nice "set it and forget it" marketing scheme, but your comment makes me think otherwise.
If so, great question. I haven't looked into this much but wouldn't expect it to be parabolic - that was just an approximation to illustrate the points raised.
Alright, makes sense. I guess a parabola is the primordial (at least, to high school teachers) example so I understand why that is what you picked.
In terms of whether a parabola makes sense for the example, it's difficult for me to say. From my personal experience I would say this could maybe be done with differential equations and something akin to an R_0. Then you would also have steady states, but the advantage would be that you can actually see how your other parameters (coefficients in the differential equations) influence the conversion rate (in my analogy R_0).
This is a good point, and you're right that some brands work this way.
I've worked agency and in-house, and most of time I've worked without budgets, just trying to maximise volume at a particular CPA. More brands are moving this way, but a few do still just stick to fixed budgets.
