Show HN: Simple script to cripple personalized targeting from Facebook

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Purpose & Effect of the Script

  • Script automates visiting Facebook’s “advertisers who used a list to reach you” and sets each one to “Don’t allow.”
  • Several commenters explain this disrupts the “refinement” step: third parties upload coarse data, Facebook enriches it with its psychographic data, and this linkage is what the script tries to cut.
  • Others note this does not stop underlying data collection by trackers and data brokers; it mainly reduces how well that data can be exploited on Facebook.

Technical Behavior & Robustness

  • Multiple users report errors (click on undefined, await syntax issues, timing problems) across Brave, Safari, Chrome.
  • People share improved versions: adding async/await, explicit wait() functions, random or longer delays, and a clickAndWait helper.
  • Some get temporarily rate-limited (“going too fast”), prompting suggestions to increase delays.
  • Script is brittle: depends on specific DOM structure (width of list items, labels, text), which can change or vary by A/B tests, territory, and UI version.
  • It may fail or misbehave when some advertisers are already set to “Don’t allow.”

Privacy, Tracking & Shadow Profiles

  • Commenters stress that even logged-out or non-users are tracked via embedded Facebook code on third-party sites.
  • Some argue shadow profiling is likely less accurate; others claim Facebook still uses such data and can share or sell insights.
  • One view: even if collection continues, not feeding Facebook clean signals (by opting out / not using the platform) still matters.

Targeted vs Untargeted Ads

  • Motivations against targeting: privacy, ethical objections to data sharing (e.g., banks or health providers uploading lists), and discomfort with “hyper-targeted” or “creepy” ads.
  • Some see targeted ads as more effective at manipulating people into buying unneeded things.
  • There’s debate on whether making ads less targeted leads to fewer or more ads:
    • One side: less targeting → less profitable inventory → fewer ads.
    • Other side: less targeting → lower revenue per impression → pressure to show more ads, though saturation and user annoyance already constrain this.

Legal / Policy & Platform Risks

  • Concern that automated interaction might violate Facebook’s terms or, in extreme interpretations, computer misuse laws.
  • Some fear permanent bans; others say a ban would be welcome or note earlier cases where similar tools led to lifetime bans.
  • Suggestions to use advertiser lists to identify unlawful data sharing (e.g., by banks, health entities) and report to national Data Protection Authorities.

Alternative Strategies & Broader Concerns

  • Alternatives mentioned: not using Facebook, using EU opt-outs, Firefox’s Facebook container, living in a country where the dominant language differs from the user’s, or using novelty language settings to break targeting.
  • Some recommend tools like AdNauseam to both hide and mass-click ads to pollute targeting data.
  • Broader worries about the “Internet of Behavior/Bodies” and pervasive tracking that may become nearly impossible to avoid.