Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

washingtonpost.com

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#61
I'll be contrarian here, since there are many people claiming the solution is paywalls (which people also whine about). (and BTW, the opinion that follows has nothing to do with my employer, Google, and their business model)

I grew up poor, my family didn't have disposable income for buying media. Everything I got, came from ad supported radio, TV, or public libraries. I used to call into radio stations to ask them to play a song, and then wait for hours so I could tape the songs and create tapes. Our family did not have cable, and though we had VHS, we often didn't rent movies, but rather used the VHS like a Tivo.

There are billions of people in the world who now have access to billions of Web documents that were paid for by advertisers, many of whom probably didn't even get their moneys worth. If the Web originated as a paywall, it would have never grown to the size and usage rates that exists today.

The first crawlers would have never arisen if anyone wanting to built a search index had to strike deals to access content for indexing.

Paywalls raise transaction barriers that ads do not. Ads make you pay in bandwidth and time, but for much of the internet's life, those were tradeoffs that were much easier to make than having to break out a credit card everytime you saw an article that MIGHT interest you. Paywalls also make centralizing vs federated/decentralized content more economically efficient.

How many of you have searched for scientific papers only to be pissed that they're behind some Springer-Verlag paywall?

Do we want to live in a world of walls, or a world of open highways with billboards? That's the choice being made here. And the scorn being heaped on ads is the luxury and privilege of living in a time when most of the content on the Web and most of the infrastructure costs have already been sunk and payed for by advertisers in years past. We live in a Web of excess now, forgetting the hundreds of billions sunk into datacenters and network infrastructure and content creation that came before. Who paid for that, and would it have even existed if the entire thing was like Cable TV premium channels?

I don't really want the Web to turn into a giant Apple Store, where every link, I must face the cognitive burden of paying for it before I know that I even want it. We need to solve the issues that ads create with respect to bandwidth hogging and privacy, but I think paywalls, even micro-payment paywalls, impose too much of a transaction cost and cognitive burden for the free exchange of knowledge.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix was TV ad-blocking for me. I hated TV and stopped watching it for many years. Then when Netflix came around, I discovered that TV production had greatly improved, and it's the ad interruptions that was poisoning the art, making me feel sick to watch it. Without the ads, I could binge watch a multiple-year series of a television show, and not feel sick.

Meh, today's cable doesn't feel that different; I just start watching the show a bit later and fast-forward the ads at 32x.

Small reminder that cable's main selling point when starting out was the removal of ads.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#63

With the risk of sounding like a broken record, it's not 'ad blocking' - it is 'content blocking'. I wish these articles would just drop the term 'ad blocking'. There may be a small minority of folk that want to block ads. Most people want to block 3rd party content and trackers. If a publication needs ad revenue, they should put the ads in their content - just like a newspaper or magazine.

Source on that, cause I block ads.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#64
post #31

I really love to be called anti-ethical by advertisers. Last time I watched TV I saw ads that told me: to drink unhealthy sugar beverages, that my son would be ashamed if I have an old and cheap car, that I should use a financial service that would give a terrible return on investment, that happiness is the same than buying things, alcohol is to only way to have fun. Sure, I have no ethics because I want to control w…

I can't imagine feeling so entitled that I would argue that people owe me web and TV content. I think that your option if you don't like the advertising that is supporting a service is to not use that service. If you feel strongly about it you could even tell the station/site the reason you are no longer using their service. I really don't understand the argument that "I don't like how they want me to pay for this se…

So you like watch ads when they come on? You never change the channel?

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#65
Advertisers brought this on themselves. With their ceaseless push to put ads everywhere, even within articles, this is what you get.

Advertising isn't inherently evil; it can be useful. It can be artistic. It can be educational. those are qualities that make ads appealing.

But if you interrupt me from what I was trying to do, it doesn't matter what the ad is. that's just rude.

Humor is a goto for advertisers, and maybe that works for some people, but for a lot of people it just rolls off.

Tide laundry detergent could show me an ad for getting a stain out using vinegar and baking soda. But instead everything needs to push people towards their products. Their products are the be-all end all. buy buy buy.

And advertisers need to be more selective of who they advertise to and how. The more verzion ads I see, the more I despise them. And if i'm watching a bunch of videos and you show me the same exact ad every time, over the course of weeks, you're a fucking idiot.

In short, this is a good thing. It's a process of evolution. Maybe they'll get their shit together, or invent something worse.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#66
post #31

I really love to be called anti-ethical by advertisers. Last time I watched TV I saw ads that told me: to drink unhealthy sugar beverages, that my son would be ashamed if I have an old and cheap car, that I should use a financial service that would give a terrible return on investment, that happiness is the same than buying things, alcohol is to only way to have fun. Sure, I have no ethics because I want to control w…

I can't imagine feeling so entitled that I would argue that people owe me web and TV content. I think that your option if you don't like the advertising that is supporting a service is to not use that service. If you feel strongly about it you could even tell the station/site the reason you are no longer using their service. I really don't understand the argument that "I don't like how they want me to pay for this se…

>I can't imagine feeling so entitled that I would argue that people owe me web and TV content.

I can't (ok, really I can, but I don't like to) imagine feeling so entitled that I would not only force someone else's computer to execute code at their detriment for my benefit, but then argue them selfish for deciding to limit what code I can get their computer to execute.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. They (the media companies that took ads too far and ruined the experience for us) did this to themselves. Ad blockers would have never proliferated, had the web not come to a state where 25% of web requests were ads and tracking requests.

I'm reminded of the ads that had audio. These were the worst! Imagine an adblocker that blocks what we know are the worst. Then, implement an upvote/downvote overlay system to the ads and if downvoted, dynamically remove them from the page and future requests on a per user basis. The votes are tallied and if beyond a certain threshold, global block. Then, sell this information back to the advertisement agencies.

Autoplaying videos. They are the worst. Especially of you have metered internet, which a sizable population does.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I have a problem with that. I don't want to live in a walled garden.

Then you are free to subject yourself to ads. If I don't feel I owe these companies a successful business model, then I certainly don't feel I owe you successful companies using that model.

And I am. I am rooting for the existing, the new and unknown who are adding value to the internet and who are helping give voices to many in the world.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#69
post #48
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are ads that can be enjoyable. It is just short entertainment. My wife and I both thought of a commercial from Target where Santa was running to the store in the middle of the night in a partially empty parking lot. https://vimeo.com/55792604 I looked up to watch that one when it would come on. It was fun. I mute the TV when I get too many drug and insurance commercials.

I don't mind ads inside my content, as long as it's not too obvious. My family has been watching The Amazing Race. It's an enjoyable reality show with not much drama. Ford and Travelocity are all over the show, but it fits with the theme and isn't overly intrusive. Now, Nissan's Rogue ad in Heroes? Good god, I hated that.

My "favorites" were the Bing searches in Hawaii Five-o: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfHuZ5qrYX4

I guess it worked, since I remember the ads (even though I didn't follow the show). I still don't use Bing, though.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#70
post #2

"Whomever you think is to blame for the sorry state of Web browsing, content blockers have a kind of ratcheting effect: Once you turn one on, chances are you won't see the kind of high-quality ads that might convince you to turn it off again. It also involves the risk that you'll miss whatever advertisers or publishers come up with to make the Web better again.", said no one ever.

That "ratcheting effect" is by design. Similarly, anti-virus software has a "ratcheting effect" in that once you install them, you don't get to see the kind of high-quality viruses and trojans that might convince your computer to encrypt all your files or give up your bank passwords. Installing an ad blocker has become another one of those "hygiene" steps that you do whenever you set up a new PC: Install Anti-virus,…

>install OS-provided updates

Windows is working pretty hard to reverse this. At the very least you now have to scan through the updates to uncheck the telemetric ones.

Post reply on HN