Pre-Conference AdTech Summarization | Gubbins

; Things you should know about AdTech, today; In His Blog, centrally hosted on LinkedIn; 2017-08-30; regwalled (you have to login to linkedin).


Boosterism in front of the trade shows
  • Exchange Wire #ATSL17
  • Dmexco
  • Programmatic IO


  • There be consolidation in the DSP category.
  • There will be more DSPs not less fewer.
  • Owned & Operated (O&O)
  • preferential deals
  • private equity companies
  • party data & a GDPR compliant screen agnostic ID
  • no “point solutions.”
  • Doubleclick Bid Manager (DBM), Google
  • Lara O’Reilly; Some Article; In Business Insider (maybe); WHEN?
    tl;dr → something about how Google DSP DBM guarantee “fraud-free” traffic.
  • Ads.txtAuthorized Digital Sellers, IAB Tech Lab
  • Claimed:
    comScore publishers are starting to adopt Ads.txt

Buy Side

Deal Flow
  • Sizmek acquired Rocket Fuel, (unverified) $145M.
  • Tremor sells its DSP to Taptica for $50M.
  • Singtel acquired Turn for $310M.
No flow, yet
  • Adform
  • MediaMath
  • DataXu
  • AppNexus

Sell Side

  • Header Bidding (HB)
    • Replaces the SSP category
    • <quote>effectively migrated the sell sides narrative & value prop of being a yield management partner to that of a feet on the street publisher re-seller.</quote>
  • QBR (Quarterly Business Result?)
  • Prebid.js
  • With server bidding, too.
  • Supply Path Optimization (SPO)
    • Brian O’Kelley (AppNexus); Article; In His Blog; WHEN?
      Brian O’Kelley, CEO, AppNexus.
    • Article; ; In ExchangeWire; WHEN?
  • Exchange Bidding in Dynamic Allocation (EBDA), Google
The Rubicon Project
a header tag, compatible with most wrappers, no proprietary wrapper, only Prebid.js
Index Exchange
a header tag, compatible with most wrappers, a proprietary wrapper
a header tag that, compatible with many (not ‘most’) wrappers, a proprietary wrapper
a header, compatible with many (not ‘most’) wrappers, a proprietary wrapper (that is better than OpenX’s which is not enterprise grade)
a header tag, compatible with many (not ‘most)’ wrappers, a proprietary wrapper.
  • TrustX
    • with
      • Digital Content Next
      • IPONWEB
      • ANA
    • Something about a transparent marketplace.
  • Something about another supply network
    • German
    • trade press in Digiday
  • No header bidding, yet.
  • Mobile equals Adware (“in app”)
    • but Apps don’t have “browsers.”
    • but App browsers don’t have “pages” with “headers.”
    • though Apps have SDKs (libraries).
  • RTL acquires SpotX
  • <quote>One could argue video is the perfect storm for header bidding, limited quality supply & maximum demand, the ideal conditions for a unified auction…</quote>
Talking Points
  • The industry is currently debating the pros & cons of running header bidding either client or server side (A lot boils down to latency V audience match rates)
  • Google offer their own version of header bidding, this is referred to as EBDA (Exchange Bidding in Dynamic Allocation) and is available to DFP customers.
  • Facebook recently entered header bidding by launching a header tag that enables publishers to capture FAN demand via header bidding on their mobile traffic.
  • Criteo entered header bidding by offering publishers their header tag (AKA Direct Bidder) that effectively delivers Criteos unique demand into the publisher’s header auction, at a 1st rather than cleared 2nd price.
  • Amazon have launched a server to server header bidding offering for publishers that delivers unique demand and the ability to manage other S2S demand partners for the publisher.
Extra Credit
  • <quote>senior AdTech big wigs</quote>
  • programmatic auction process
  • 1st v 2nd price
  • 2nd price was for waterfall
  • 1st price will be for unified (header bidding)

General Data Protection Regulation’ (GDPR)

  • 2018-05
  • Consent must be collected.
  • Will make 2nd party data marketplaces economical.
  • The salubrious effect.
  • Publishers have a Direct Relationship with consumers.
    this is argued as being “better.”
  • Industry choices
    • collect holistic consent
      <quote>one unified [process] of consumer [outreach] rather than one for every vendor</quote>
    • individual vendor consent
      <quote>for every cookie or device ID that flows through the OpenRTB pipes we have spent the last 10 years laying.</quote>

Viewability & Brand Safety

  • IAB
  • MRC

Talking Points

  • Moat was sold to Oracle for reported number of $800M.
  • PE Firm Providence Equity bought a % of Double Verify giving them a reported value of $300M.
  • Integral Ad Science remains independent, for now


  • Telcos have what everybody in AdTech wants:
    • accurate data
    • privacy compliant data
    • scaled data
    • 1st party data.
  • Telcos want what AdTech & publishing companies have:
    • programmatic sell and buy side tools
    • content creation functions
    • distribution at scale.
    • diversification of revenues

Talking Points

  • Verizon buys AOL & Yahoo to form Oath, a publisher, a DSP, a DMP.
  • Telenor buys TapAd, a cross-device DMP-type-thing
  • Altice buys Teads, a streaming video vendor)
  • Singtel buys Turn, a DSP
  • AT&T needs a line in this list; might want to buy Time Warner which is a movie studio, media holding copmany, a cable operator, an old owner of AOL.
Raised $18.75M, Series A. Why?
Raised $20M, through Series B, Why?

Data Management Platform (DMP)

  • Not a pure-play business.
    • A division, not a business.
    • An interface, not a division.
  • Everyone wants to own one.
  • Should DMP’s also be in the media buying business?
  • What are DMP’s doing to stay relevant for a world without cookies?
  • Do DMP’s plan to build or buy device graph features / functions?
  • For platforms that process & model a lot of 1st, 2nd & 3rd party data, how will they be affected by the pending GDPR?
Talking Points
  • Adobe bought Tube Mogul, a video DSP, for $540M (based on information &amp belief).
  • Oracle bought Moat, a verification feature, for $800M
  • Oracle bought Crosswise, a cross-device database, for <unstated/>
  • Salesforce bought Krux, a DMP, FOR $700M

Lotame remains independent, for now

ID Consortium’s & Cross-Device Players

Probabilistic “won’t work”
<quote>The GDPR may make it very difficult for a number of probabilistic methods to be applied to digital ID management.</quote>
Walled Garden
They … <quote>are using their own proprietary cross-screen deterministic token / people based ID that in many cases only works within their O&O environments.</quote>
Universal ID
Is desired. <quote>CMO’s & agencies in the future will not be requesting a cleaner supply chain, but a universal ID (or ID clearing house) that will enable them to manage reach, frequency & attribution across all of the partners they buy from.</quote>
The DigiTrust
<quote>This technology solution creates an anonymous user token, which is propagated by and between its members in lieu of billions of proprietary pixels and trackers on Web pages.</quote>
Claim: “Many” leading AdTech companies are already working with the DigiTrust team. [Which?]
AppNexus ID Consortium
  • Scheme: people-based ID.
  • Launch: 2017-05
  • Trade Name: TBD
    • Index Exchange
    • LiveRamp
    • OpenX
    • Live Intent
    • Rocket Fuel
  • Adbrain
  • Screen6
  • Drawbridge



  • Blockchain is slow, too slow, way too slow
    Blockchain can handle 10 tps.
  • Does not work in OpenRGB
    • New York City
  • Some Q&A; In AdExchanger
    tl;dr → interview of Dr Boris WHO?, IPONWEB; self-styled “the smartest man in AdTech and he concurs”

Artificial Intelligence

  • Is bullshit.
  • c.f.(names dropped)
    • Deepmind
    • Boston Dynamics


  • DOOH
  • Audio
  • Programmatic TV
  • Over The Top (OTT)
  • MarTech != AdTech

Previously filled.

On means & methods for predicting the timing of IPv6 adoption

Previously filled.


I’m more interested in concepts and approaches rather than the answer itself. Some background on developing the answer to this particular question follows below.

My interest here is more around how to phrase these claims such that they are meaningful over the time scales that we’re working with. One of the difficulties in working with claims over long enough periods of time is that institutions, currencies and measurement apparatus can vary sufficiently or fail outright across those time scales. I’m concerned with approaches to the “and how shall we test that?” Election results: easy; Hollywood movie sales: a procedure exists; Simon-Ehrlich or Bjorn Lomborg type wagers: controversial, but possible; and so on. What is of interest in this particular case is not whether something will happen in a binary sense but how soon something that is known to be happening is going to reach a significant enough level to matter, for some relevant definition of “matters.”

My interest is in how one goes about framing these questions (claims) about the future in a meaningful way, one that will be meaningful in the transition into the future as action against the claims will not be continued if the previous calls to action are no longer relevant. Futurism being but memoir writing if it isn’t tied to planning and thus to action. In the IPv6 case, the timing is important from an online entertainment perspective as the investment in the new networking scheme is significant. From a consumer standpoint, customer premises equipment is rarely churned unless it is force-replaced by the internet service provider. These technologies take multiple decades to roll out and be adopted so they are well within the time-span that we consider in the course (-10 years < t < +10 years).

On using wagers to “know the future”

There have been and maybe still are interesting expreriments with prediction markets against diffusion of innovation questions. Spoiler: the market (game) failed when two fine folks figured out how to run an arbitrage scheme on it; there were no countervailing forces sufficient to counteract the scheme. There exist other surveys in academic paper form of intra-corporate opinion markets. Separately filled.

Behind these is the thesis that a market can “know” things (encode knowledge) that no individual participant can “know” (understand). The aphorism often used is “In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.” This folk wisdom is usually attributed to Benjamin Graham and then Warren Buffet.


On the evolving IPv6 transition

In this particular case, we have (the industry has) a sufficient answer for business purposes and elements of the industry have been acting upon the answer as suits their temperament for risk and prospection. Google: yes (as shown), Comcast: yes, AT&T: no, Verizon: yes. RFC 6598 of 2012-04 were developed to support ISPs who have as-built infrastructure that will not be making the transition. Parts of Yahoo’s merchant ad systems went live 2012 (I drove that); the rest is transitioning now. The Google chart is interesting in that it did not hit 5% until two years ago. Prior to that one could reasonably say from a business perspective that there was “no business need” to consider the technology.

Some of these dates give the concept of how long these things take:

IPv6 was “in trials.”
B2B-type production availability; e.g. Solaris.
Microsoft shipped IPv6 default-enabled in Vista.
IPv4 was considered to have been exhausted in North America
“the Internet is full, please dial in at a later time.”

There are other longer technology transitions still under way.

On the continuing 64-bit transition

There is a wonderful survey article from ACM Queue that surveys the transition to 64-bit two-score year transition to 64-bit technologies. One is beginning to see the industry transition wholly to 64-bit for server-class and office-work-class gear and 32-bit and below for so called “IoT” leaf-level devices. The key signal for the future here is Intel’s announcement last month repudiating substantially all of their consumer-focused IoT SBC product lines. The supporting staff is now gone; Intel won’t be in that line of business going forward. And they aren’t a supplier in low-power “mobile” consumer gear meaningfully either. It’s an interesting question that: in 2027, “Intel Inside” means … ???


That other cultural transition, that didn’t happen.

The previous examples are all very in-trade and deeply technical. A more culturally-relevant transition that is still unfolding and is likely to several-multiple more generations to complete is the transition to the metric system in the United States, outside of narrow application domains. We tried but the U.S. population still trades against gallons of gas, quarts of milk, auto tires in pounds-per-square-inch; 55 miles per hour saves lives and gas-gallons, and thermostats shall be set to 65 degrees or lower. We are proscribed against carrying more than 3 ounces of toothpaste into airplanes nowadays.

One could imagine that what can’t (won’t) be different in any future scenario is the U.S. popular or commercial measurement system.

Originally a discussion point for PDV-91.

AT&T’s plan to watch your Web browsing—and what you can do about it | Ars Technica

AT&T’s plan to watch your Web browsing—and what you can do about it; ; In Ars Technica; 2015-03-27.
Teaser: Want to opt out? It could cost up to $744 extra per year.

tl;dr => You have to pay to opt out. Get a VPN.


  • the article
    • is discursive
    • lots of backfill from the pseudonymous commentariat at Ars Forums.
    • tl;dr => the fee is there, either pay it or get a VPN.
  • GigaPower, a product name

    • startup fee
    • + $99/month for DSL-type service
    • + $29/month for tracking-limitation.
    • ⨉ $30% various taxes & user fees
    • = ~$175-$200/month
  • Relevant Advertising, a product name
  • Alternates
  • Precedents
    • Charter, ad insertion, tracking&targeting; abandoned 2008
    • CMA Communication, ad insertion; reported circa 2013-04.
  • Regulatory
    • Something vague about U.S. wiretap law; but opt-in consent trumps this.
    • Something vague about EU data law; but …



  • <quote>AT&T’s best pricing may not be available in cities where it doesn’t compete against Google Fiber. In Dallas, where Google Fiber hasn’t arrived, AT&T was charging $120 a month for gigabit service and still requiring the customer to opt in to Internet Preferences.</quote>
  • <quote>AT&T describes Internet Preferences as “opt-in,” but its website advertises the lower price without mentioning the traffic scanning unless you click “See offer details.”</quote> An actuality of the AT&T consumer acquisition screens is exhibited.
  • <quote>AT&T Internet Preferences works independently of your browser’s privacy settings regarding cookies, do-not-track, and private browsing, If you opt-in to AT&T Internet Preferences, AT&T will still be able to collect and use your Web browsing information independent of those settings. Using the IP address assigned to each GigaPower account, AT&T scans for your AT&T Internet Preferences election, AT&T will treat your Internet browsing activity in accordance with your election. If you chose to participate in the AT&T Internet Preferences program, your Internet traffic is routed to AT&T’s Internet Preferences Web browsing and analytics platform.</quote> attributed to AT&T, either to a document or a speaker (unclear).


  • Privacy Is Becoming a Premium Service; David Auerbach; In Slate; 2015-03-31.
    Teaser: AT&T wants customers to pay the company not to spy on them. And it’s not an outlier.
    Teaser: AT&T Gigapower: The company wants you to pay it not to sell your data

    • wholly derivative of the Ars Technica piece; somewhat more cogent.


Original reporting, a month earlier, in archaeological order (derivatives on top, original work below).

  • AT&T’s Offer: Share Your Data for Personalized Ads, or Pay More; Natasha Singer; In The New York Times (NYT); 2015-02-18.

    • Original reporting the WSJ piece, nearby
    • Quoted
      • Gretchen Schultz, press relations, AT&T
      • Jonathan Mayer, activist, Stanford University (still a graduate student?)
  • AT&T Offers Data Privacy – for a Price; Elizabeth Dwoskin, Thomas Gryta; In The Wall Street Journal (WSJ); 2015-02-10.

    • <quote>AT&T’s new service uses searches terms entered, Web pages visited, and links clicked. The tracking remains in effect even if you clear cookies, use an ad block program, or switch on a browser’s do-not-track settings. The company uses the data it collects to help advertisers target ads on Web pages, email messages or direct mail.</quote>
    • Pricing
      • + $70/month for service
      • + $29/month for “opt out”
      • ✕ 30% user fees & taxes
    • Framing (by AT&T press relations)
      <quote>not as a charge to people who opted out of tracking but as a discount to those who didn’t. “We can offer a lower price to customers participating in AT&T Internet Preferences because advertisers will pay us for the opportunity to deliver relevant advertising and offers tailored to our customer’s interests,”</quote>
    • Quoted
      • Jonathan Mayer, activist, Stanford University
      • Marc Rotenberg, President & Executive Director, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).
    • Similar
      • AT&T
      • Verizon
    • Concept
      • <quote>The companies stored hidden, undeletable tracking codes on customers’ phones. </quote>
      • <quote>there was no way to opt out of these so-called super-cookies, which let the service providers track them across all devices and monitor device location at all times.</quote>


SOLVED: reporting spam SMS messages on AT&T’s network -> forward to 7726


  • You are on AT&T’s cellular service.
  • You receive an (unwanted) spam SMS message.
  • You wish to report this to make it stop.


  • Forward the SMS message to 7726 (SPAM).
  • The bot responds
  • Forward the phone number to the bot.
  • The bot thanks you.



AT&T Password Restrictions: twelve chars short of a UUID, but no swears

Password Restrictions

  • Passwords are case sensitive.
  • The password must be 6-24 characters and may consist of a combination of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, underscores (_), or hyphens (-).
  • Passwords can’t be all letters or all numbers.
  • The password can’t be the same as your AT&T Access ID.
  • The password can’t contain the words “password,” “admin,” “pa$$w0rd,” or other common words.
  • The password can’t contain obscene language.


  • Perilously close to being able to use UUIDs for passwords. Huzzah!
  • Not clear how the obscene language proscription is helpful anywhere in the stack at all; they’re hashing them immediately and irrevocably on intake, yes?