Get in touch
Sign up for workshop announcements and updates:
Upcoming EventsEvents cannot currently be displayed, sorry! Please check back later.
We are here
Rodhus Studios (back entrance)
Author Archives: Chris Holden
Many years ago, cross-domain security meant that what happened on one site couldn’t be disclosed to another. Then, with the advert of social media, and content being shared, re-shared, regurgitated and re-presented as new information (when it’s actually a re-hash of someone else’s content) ad-bloody-infinitum such restrictions were relaxed. And if not, exactly relaxed, then workarounds were created, and generally deemed accessible – anything, so long as critically important things like a Twitter feed or Facebook status update could be presented as part of the existing web page.
It’s not that long ago that the web development community derided Microsoft’s insistence on not only supporting, but promoting, iframes. Now they’re used everywhere.
And that nasty 3d-effect border that a lot of browsers insisted on displaying, in order to demonstrate what a stupid idea using inlines frames was, has all but disappeared.
These days, content from one page appears as if it’s part of another, with the clever use of iframes and a bit of jQuery. In fact, eBay uses exactly this technique to display content when you click on the “my eBay” link – sometimes it goes a bit screwy and you get multiple scroll bars all over the place, but it the main, it’s often impossible to tell if the content you’re reading is actually coming from the web site that appears in your web browser’s address bar.
Whatever the means or the method, advertisers have always been quick to jump on technology to ram yet more marketing rubbish, if not down our throats, then at least in front of our eyeballs. What’s getting a little bit insidious is how major website owners are happy to cross-charge each other (and ultimately, the end customer) for showing adverts which are simply inappropriate.
Here’s just one example:
I recently search Farnell for some 24C256 eeprom chips.
I even got so far as to add a few to a basket. Then I checked the cost of sending them, if I didn’t hit the minimum £20 order level. It was too pricey, so I thought I’d try another site.
So I searched eBay for the same chips and got a list of results.
But right there at the bottom of the page, was an advert for Farnell
It didn’t just say “hey, we sell these chips as well, why not buy some from us?”
The data that tracked me adding them to my basket but then not completing the checkout has been passed to eBay. So now eBay uses this information to display an advert, to encourage me back to Farnell.
Which, as an eBay customer just seems stupid.
If the advert is successful, and lures me back to Farnell, then eBay (and the eBay sellers I would otherwise have shopped with) have lost out. So why are eBay sellers being charged ever more to advertise on a platform which is quite happy to encourage buyers to shop on an entirely different site? Why would eBay think sending customers to a “rival” site is a good idea for anyone (except themselves, taking a rake from the advertising revenue)?
But that’s not my major issue.
My issue is that this so-called “smart advertising” just isn’t… well… smart enough.
Here’s the thing, Farnell.
You know I visited your site.
You know I wanted to buy 24C265 eeprom chips.
You even know that I went to your checkout page.
You know that I didn’t buy goods from you.
And you know that I then went to eBay to find someone selling exactly the same products.
Here’s where I’d like Farnell to use the tiniest little bit of intelligence:
WHY didn’t I buy from you?
WHY did I get all the way to the checkout, then jump onto another site, looking for exactly the same product?
It’s not like I went looking for an alternative; I didn’t search the Farnell catalogue, fail to find what I wanted, and so tried to find it somewhere else. There’s only one reason that could be deduced (even by a stupid computer) for my reason not to purchase – I thought I could buy it cheaper elsewhere. So why would anyone think that putting a picture of a sad puppy would make me abandon that quest, and return back to the website I’d just dismissed as too expensive? For all the intelligence and data gathering that these massive companies undertake, the reasoning behind showing “targetted” adverts just seems pretty dumb.
I hate advertising on the ‘net. I hate spam, and Twatter and Facebook, and the constant barrage of adverts that litter many web pages. But I also appreciate that, for some, it’s a necessary evil. I’d even concede that, sometimes – if it’s targetted well enough – advertising might even be useful for the customer.
But the current level of “intelligence” being used by advertisers is about 2 out of 10 – and falling. And I just wonder what the thinking is behind all this cross-site advertising when, even a cursory analysis would conclude that, in perhaps eight out of ten cases, it’s completely inappropriate!
It’s been a few weeks where most of our nerd-work has been coding (the app for our electronic board game is starting to look very impressive btw, we’re just not quite ready to unveil it yet!). So it was nice to spend a few hours this weekend working on… Continue reading
It’s been about ten days since the last meaningful blog update, which can only mean one thing – coding! Actually, it could mean that real life has been getting in the way of nerding about (it has: with the first few nice, sunny, days of 2014 there’s be… Continue reading
It’s baby Elvis’ birthday soon, so I promised I’d make a personalised toy for him. I thought it would be a doddle, as we’ve already got all the component parts for a really cool “talking toy” from other projects, it’d just be a matter of sticking them … Continue reading
I’ve had my laptop with Windows 8 (later upgraded to 8.1 with the first release of updates) for a few years now. I don’t understand all the anti-Microsoft hate. True, they seem to be following the good-rubbish pattern of old (XP good, Vista rubbish, Wi… Continue reading
The Arduino VirtualWire makes communication between two microcontrollers really easy – simply send some data onto the TX module and it magically appears on the on RX module. We’ve already built most of this functionality using our Manchester encoding/d… Continue reading
Having built a single-wire transmitter, it’s time to receive the encoded data.We’re running this code on a PIC16F883 on it’s own internal oscillator at 8Mhz. The code includes error checking, but not correction- i.e. if a message received is junk, it’s… Continue reading
We’ve been playing about with one-wire Manchester-encoded data again, only this time using (our preferred) Oshonsoft PIC compiler. We’ve been using pretty much the same techniques as before, only this time, in BASIC rather than C.Here’s the first part,… Continue reading
I’d forgotten all about this, until a parcel arrived yesterday, from Singapore or somewhere like that. I’ve been hitting eBay quite hard lately, so it could have been any number of things. But it turned out to be my Kickstarter reward for a project I b… Continue reading