-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 227
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify the path that contextual bids take in the auction #260
Comments
To add another question that could use some direct clarification:
|
I think your second question depends on the answer to the first, so I’ll answer them together. I think the first question can be answered no or yes, but I imagine the answer being no in practice:
This depends on the previous question. If the contextual ad is rendered in a fenced frame, then the answer is likely yes. If the contextual ad is rendered in an iframe, the answer is likely no.
FLEDGE supports using some frequency information to adjust FLEDGE interest group bids. The contextual bid is calculated outside of FLEDGE and so things like Shared Storage make sense for frequency capping in this case.
FLEDGE is designed to not expose information about a user’s activity on other sites, so cannot be used to block a contextual campaign. Shared Storage could be used to block such ads.
There are downsides to giving generateBid() access to other interest groups. I talk about some here. |
So I can see how Shared Storage can be used to block ads or provide frequency capping. Honestly, I'm not sure of the status of that proposal as we haven't talked of it in some time, so I didn't want to presume such data would be available. I do think it's a major problem that contextual bids happen only outside the browser. Frequency capping is one thing, but generally speaking, the value for an ad shown on repeated occasions drops. That doesn't mean you aren't willing to show the ad, just that you only want to pay less for it. The bid price can also be a function of the most recent time that you've shown the ad, e.g. there's a difference between showing the ad for the tenth time after you've done the previous nine in the last five minutes, versus the previous nine all happened yesterday. This could all be performed with data using Shared Storage, but only if the browser can perform additional computations. This doesn't create any privacy concerns and it's pretty crucial to maintaining the overall market dynamics that we see today. This is why I'm offering to write a PR to support this functionality. |
If you want frequency or recency information to affect the pricing of the contextual bid, including affecting the decision of whether the contextual ad should beat out a FLEDGE ad, then this is exactly the motivation to justify Paul's "The contextual ad does participate in the auction" possibility. But are you imagining that a contextual ad might hit a frequency cap and so refuse to serve at all? If so then we need a fallback ad, so multiple contextual ads are required, and we must render something. As Valentino mentioned, there is further discussion of this in #116. And indeed it goes along with requiring that the ad be rendered in a Fenced Frame, as Paul says. |
Since frequency capping is being brought up, I'll mention this proposal: https://github.com/google/ads-privacy/tree/master/proposals/browser-frequency-capping. |
thanks for the responses but I'm not quite sure I see an answer to my question. I understand that there are different ways to get to a final result here, but I'm specifically asking which one we're picking: are you thinking of rendering the contextual ad in the fenced frame and having it be part of the browser auction or are you thinking of doing it differently? |
Sorry for the confusion. The answer to your question is in two parts:
|
Currently the spec doesn't quite talk much about the path that contextual requests will take aside from being a separate request that happens server side.
For example:
Maybe I'm missing the bits in the spec where I could find answers to those.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: