Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
well, bye bye privacy. Soon your headphones will measure your response to the ads you see.
Verification can is closing in
I mean... Couldn't smart watches do the exact same thing?
Yes, 100%. For instance, my Pixel Watch measures and logs my heart rate every second. Though I doubt that something as volatile as a user's heart rate has any significant value to advertisers, over the treasure trove of other, more reliable data points they already have collected on any given user.
People act like every single facet of their lives has some intrinsic advertising value, when really it's only specific things that advertisers are interested in. They want to know your habits; what sites you go to, what physical spaces you frequently visit, what sort of content you consume, what you spend your money on, etc. Those are metrics that advertisers can capitalize on to make sure that they're serving you ads that you're more likely to engage with.
Biometric data, on the other hand, is basically worthless. Even if we pretend that Google is using my heart rate data from my Fitbit profile for advertisements, that data gives Google basically nothing to work with. Did my heart rate fluctuate because of an ad I saw? Or did it fluctuate because I stood up and walked to the kitchen while a YouTube ad was playing? There's no easy way to discern this sort of nuance, making it effectively useless for advertising purposes.
Maybe if we lived in a more cyberpunk world where advertisers could access things like our serotonin or dopamine levels, and could link that directly to things we're actively seeing/hearing, that would be worthwhile to advertisers, because then they could actually know how something you interacted with affected your brain chemistry. But as it stands right now, heart rate by itself is little more than junk data.
Right, this is exactly my point. One biometric data point on its own isn't enough, you need a lot more to glean any useful information.
Until your earbuds start tracking all of these, worries over whether or not it'll be used for advertising are just FUD.
Biometric data is not useless. Perhaps yours alone is, but ALL of ours… combined with our location history, income level, job industry, shopping preferences, spending habits, etc, are worth quite a bit.
Biometric data is useful for establishing identity, that can be used to correlate data better and for surveillance purposes.
Some biometric data can be used for IDing, but unless you have a particularly unique sinus rhythm, I don't think heart rate can really be used to identify anybody.