Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adblockers: The Only Way Out

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#41

Post by coldpie »

mdip wrote: post #23

I'm not surprised by the low number (9%) who felt a little bit of guilt installing ad blocking technology. If you feel guilty, you probably aren't using a blocker, hence the low number. I feel no guilt, personally. I began using an ad blocker after receiving a nasty bit of Flash based malware via an ad served by one of the major ad networks (I can't recall who, but I want to say it was via MSN at the time). That was…

I feel guilty that the content I enjoy isn't receiving any funds from me to continue making that content, but I'm not convinced ads are the correct solution to that problem.

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#42

Post by x0x0 »

a3n wrote: post #38
chias wrote: post #9

Unless the advertising landscape changes drastically from what it is today, I will never not use an ad-blocker, and I reject the notion that it is somehow unethical: for over a decade and a half the online advertising industry has been exploiting every technical loophole or shenanigan it has been able to find in order to degrade my experience, security, privacy for the sake of their bottom line; the comparatively rec…

> Unless the advertising landscape changes drastically from what it is today, I will never not use an ad-blocker, and I reject the notion that it is somehow unethical: I go to a site. That site hands me over to a completely different network. My target site's owner has no idea what's running on that other network. My target site exposed me to danger. No thank you.

Yet somehow you still keep going to the target site.

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#43

Post by alhenaworks »

symlinkk wrote: post #28

Honestly I think the increased use of adblockers is pushing us towards a situation where we will get our content from a "walled garden" like Apple News, Google Play Newsstand, or, in the near future, some sort of Facebook integrated news reader.

>some sort of facebook integrated news reader.

The main feed already acts like this, only the news stories are those false sensationalist articles being shared by people that believe them.

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#44

Post by freddref »

I block ads because I don't like the idea of ads. I'm tired of the constant attempts to persuade me this way or that. I want my attention span back. Plus, the vast majority of content on the web just isn't worth putting up with ads for. I don't even read the content any more, the comments are much more informative and entertaining. ;)

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#45

Post by cwyers »

jwe wrote: post #37
vitd wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use lots of micropayment systems - Netflix, Apple Music, Spotify, etc. Seems like they're on the rise right now.

I might be wrong but I don't think those are services that can be characterised as micropayment like e.g. Flattr is ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment for more).

Right, those are macropayments -- pay once, and you have access to all content covered by the service for the month. That's bundling, and it reduces the friction/cognitive load required to decide if each microtransaction is worth it -- every song/movie/etc. is "free" after the initial payment, so you don't spend time worrying about whether or not this particular song is worth 0.05 cents or whatever, you decide that Spotify as a whole is worth the subscription fee and then you consume as much music as you want without further worry.

(The OTHER common thread to all those examples is that none of those actually make enough money to pay for the absolute cost of the content they offer -- with the exception of some Netflix originals and Spotify-exclusive tracks and what have you, the vast majority of the content on those subscription services is licensed to those platforms at some MARGINAL cost, and the cost of actually making that content has already been paid for by theatrical showings, TV rights fees, album sales, etc. They're not really sustainable models as they exist right now once theaters, TV channels and album sales start to die out, which is where the sort of content that is being talked about here already is at -- content that needs to cover the ABSOLUTE cost of creation through online revenues.)

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#46

Post by ffn »

In my opinion, the "news" / "blog" agencies have already innovated on this by just blending content with advertising with notoriously click-baity articles like "top 12 ways your cat wants you dead" where every single bullet point is a cleverly worded advertising for cat neutering, cat food, or whatever.

I suspect Facebook already does something similar via automating the hundreds of millions of dead accounts in their system. My suspicions were triggered because a decade ago when FB was still fresh, I created a page for my dog (now passed away), and very recently, it shared a "funny" video. So either my dog is using facebook from beyond the grave, or fb has automated his account.

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#47

Post by benchtobedside »

ffn wrote: post #46

In my opinion, the "news" / "blog" agencies have already innovated on this by just blending content with advertising with notoriously click-baity articles like "top 12 ways your cat wants you dead" where every single bullet point is a cleverly worded advertising for cat neutering, cat food, or whatever. I suspect Facebook already does something similar via automating the hundreds of millions of dead accounts in their…

Or perhaps this dog in question was using an easily brute-forceable password, and control now rests with one of the many huge botnets in operation.

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#49

Post by BookmarkSaver »

ef4 wrote: post #36
nemothekid wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you broadcast your radio or TV signal over the airwaves, I can watch or listen just to the content and switch it off, mute it, fast forward it, etc. during the ads. I have no obligation to watch or listen to them and I don't. He said it was unethical, not impossible. Likewise if there is a public fruit stand on the side of the road with no one around, and the owners expect people to take fruit and leave money…

Did you really just make the argument that getting up to go to the bathroom during a broadcast TV commercial is the same thing as stealing fruit?

Did you really just blatantly ignore his valid point with a BS nitpicking about his comparison?

Re: Adblockers: The Only Way Out

#50

Post by nemothekid »

ef4 wrote: post #36
nemothekid wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you broadcast your radio or TV signal over the airwaves, I can watch or listen just to the content and switch it off, mute it, fast forward it, etc. during the ads. I have no obligation to watch or listen to them and I don't. He said it was unethical, not impossible. Likewise if there is a public fruit stand on the side of the road with no one around, and the owners expect people to take fruit and leave money…

Did you really just make the argument that getting up to go to the bathroom during a broadcast TV commercial is the same thing as stealing fruit?

No, and I don't understand how you can honestly make that conclusion without being purposely obtuse. Intent is a huge factor of this (as is what is ethical), one is being purposely malicious (actively blocking ads, purposely taking money), and the other is just someone using the bathroom.
Post reply on HN