• 2 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle


  • DandomRude@lemmy.worldOPtoMemes@lemmy.mlDegrees of Disaster
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I was wondering about that as well. We’ll probably never know. Anyway, I’m glad that her unwanted internet fame in this timeline hasn’t ruined her life and that she seems to have benefited from it instead - at least financially. That’s nice, because she really deserves to be compensated for the joy she brought to the internet over the years.





  • I think the so-called KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) are a major problem of our time, because they are often defined incorrectly or misunderstood. All too often, decision-makers seem to think that the pure number of followers, for example, or engagement metrics such as likes would indicate that an account or post is successful. However, this is often not the case when other important metrics are taken into account. In e-commerce, for example, a large number of followers or high engagement figures in themselves mean nothing at all: it is not uncommon for e-commerce companies to invest a lot of money in social media management and for the KPIs of their accounts to rise accordingly - but still not sell anything via this channel (that means that the investment is not worth it, of course, because the costs are disproportionate to the sales generated; the ROI is often not good at all). I think a similar situation can be assumed for many science accounts on Mastodon, for example. Although the number of followers maybe not very high here because there are less active useres, the quality of comments can still be a lot higher. But unfortunately this cannot be quantified, or at least not easily. I therefore think that everyone should first think about what they want to achieve with their social media accounts. It then makes sense to define suitable KPIs instead of being impressed by what can be considered an indicator of success elsewhere and in a completely different context.





  • This is presumably not a bad thing, as Google would most likely have benefited the most from this, especially as the so-called “privacy sandbox” that Google had planned as a replacement or server-side tracking are even more difficult to avoid. The “privacy sandbox” in particular would have been more of a competitive advantage for Google because, as the provider of Chrome, they are the only ones who have comprehensive access to aggregated user data that is collected directly via the browser.








  • Google’s ReCaptcha in version 3 works in the background. Instead of displaying images of crosswalks and such, it uses a kind of risk score. This risk score is based on user behavior: If someone has behaved like a human in the past and thus gets a low risk score, the captcha is passed without you having to do anything or even seeing it.

    I assume that Google uses data from it’s own services, web analytics applications and usage data from Andoird devices and Chrome for this. Of course, this is not without its privacy issues but it’s convenient.